University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Managing leadership transitions in an international school context

(USC Thesis Other)

Managing leadership transitions in an international school context

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Managing Leadership Transitions in an International School Context
by
Timothy Michael Trainor

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2022

© Copyright by Timothy Michael Trainor 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Timothy Michael Trainor certifies the approval of this Dissertation

David Cash
Darline Robles
Lawrence Picus, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
This study explored how a P–12 school, identified as The American International School (AIS)
for this study, plans for, manages, and supports principal and assistant principal successions
and examined how recently appointed principals and assistant principals experienced their
transition into their new roles. Senior school leaders involved with the process of planning,
managing, and supporting principal and assistant principal succession were interviewed, as were
principals and assistant principals who commenced their roles during the 2020–21 and 2021–22
school years. After an analysis of the data gathered through 11 semi-structured interviews, the
following seven themes emerged: A culture of growth and feedback, the dimensions of effective
school leadership at AIS, building and nurturing strong leadership teams, developing future
school leaders, managing leadership succession at AIS, new leader socialization supports, and
new leader perceptions of their transition. The findings from this study showed that AIS was
committed to developing its leadership capacity internally and that a more intentional approach
to succession planning was emerging. Models of distributive leadership were found to be an
effective support for the school’s leadership pipeline when steppingstone roles were strategically
designed to develop the facets of leadership necessary to succeed at the next level. Findings from
the study also suggest that intentionally designed steppingstone roles helped to extend the
window of professional and organizational socialization, resulting in a smoother transition for
internally promoted school leaders.

v
Acknowledgements
As I finish up this dissertation in the same week that I turn 40, Google was kind enough
to send me a quick snapshot of the past 3 years. A lot has happened. Beyond the aesthetics of a
few more wrinkles, an influx of gray hair, and a general veneer of fatigue, there has also been the
arrival of our second son, Alex. In making it to this point, I have been privileged to be
surrounded by an incredible support system and would like to take a moment to share my
immense gratitude.
To my wife, Melissa, thank you for all your love, encouragement, and patience over the
past couple of years. I know you have taken on all the important aspects of parenting so that I
could prioritize time with our boys. Thank you for every email you sent on my behalf, every
parent WhatsApp group you joined, and the parent conferences you reorganized so I could
attend. I promise to do better. I will even take the occasional photo so that I no longer look like a
single parent in our family album. You are amazing and we are all lucky to have you.
To Jack and Alex, thank you for always being full of energy and unintentionally
reminding me to keep perspective and remember what is important. I can’t wait to spend more
time with you both. Thanks also to Yasuko, my mother-in-law, for showering our boys with love
on their way to and from school. There is so much you do to help keep this family happy and
healthy and we love having you with us. To my mum, Debbie, thank you for all the sacrifices
you made to make sure each of your six children had the education you knew was important.
None of us would have made it without your constant love and support.
Finally, to my dissertation chair Dr. Laurence Picus, and my committee members Dr.
Darline Robles and Dr. David Cash, thank you for your care, support, and guidance. I hope the
rest of my career will do justice to the time you have invested in me throughout this process.

vi
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. x
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................................................................. 1
Organizational Context ....................................................................................................... 4
Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... 8
Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................................... 9
Proposed Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................... 10
Definition of Terms........................................................................................................... 14
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 16
Why Principals Matter ...................................................................................................... 17
Leading in an International School Context ..................................................................... 26
Succession Planning in Education .................................................................................... 32
Managing Principal Succession ........................................................................................ 39
Summary of Literature Review ......................................................................................... 49
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 53
Procedure .......................................................................................................................... 54
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 55
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 56
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 58
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 59
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 61
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 65

vii
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 66
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 67
Interviews .......................................................................................................................... 69
A Culture of Growth and Feedback .................................................................................. 71
The Dimensions of Effective School Leadership at AIS .................................................. 77
Building and Nurturing Strong Leadership Teams ........................................................... 82
Developing Future School Leaders ................................................................................... 90
Managing Leadership Succession at AIS ......................................................................... 99
New Leader Socialization Supports ................................................................................ 104
New Leader Perceptions of Their Transitions ................................................................ 111
Chapter Five: Discussion ............................................................................................................ 122
Summary of Findings ...................................................................................................... 122
Study Limitations ............................................................................................................ 141
Implications for Practice ................................................................................................. 142
Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 143
Future Research .............................................................................................................. 155
Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 155
References ................................................................................................................................... 158
Appendix A: Senior Leadership Team Interview Protocol......................................................... 172
Setting the Stage ............................................................................................................. 173
Heart of the Interview ..................................................................................................... 174
Closing Question ............................................................................................................. 176
Closing Comments .......................................................................................................... 177
Appendix B: Principal and Assistant Principal Interview Protocol ............................................ 178
Setting the Stage ............................................................................................................. 179

viii
Heart of the Interview ..................................................................................................... 180
Closing Question ............................................................................................................. 182
Closing Comments .......................................................................................................... 182

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of the Sample of Participants Interviewed 68

x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Proposed Conceptual Framework 10

1

Chapter One: Overview of the Study
Over the past 2 decades, there has been a growing consensus within the literature that an
investment in selecting, preparing, and supporting a high-quality principal workforce offers some
of the highest returns with respect to improving student outcomes (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Grissom
et al, 2021; Leithwood et al, 2004; Levin et al., 2020). While earlier work from Leithwood et al.
(2004) had suggested that school leadership was second only to classroom instruction in
improving outcomes for students, more recent work from Grissom et al. (2021) concludes that
school leaders are “as important as previous reports have suggested, in fact, their importance
may not have been stated strongly enough” (p. 91). The role of school leadership has also
continued to expand in its complexity, with effective school leaders expected to establish
ambitious visions, and support them through the advancement of staff capacity and the
innovative restructuring of their organizations (Grissom et al, 2021; Leithwood et al., 2004). The
traditional safe pair of hands managerial approach to leadership is no longer sufficient, with
school leaders now charged with building school systems that can learn and change quickly in
pursuit of continuous school improvement (Bierly & Shy, 2013).
Unfortunately, school leadership turnover continues to undermine these efforts with
approximately 20% of principals in the United States leaving their posts each year after an
average tenure of approximately 4 years (Goldring & Taie, 2018; Levin & Bradley, 2019; Miller,
2013). This principal turnover has been shown to negatively impact student achievement, teacher
retention, and school climate (Bartanen et al, 2019; Grissom et al., 2021), with the fatigue of
frequent principal succession also leading to a dampening in teacher and community support for
incoming principals (Hargreaves et al., 2003). It is a similar story within the transient
2

international school context too, with Benson (2011) reporting the average time in office for a
head of an international school to be 3.7 years.
Failure to plan for and manage the succession of school leaders is one of the most
common sources for derailing school improvement efforts (Hargreaves & Fink, 2004;
Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Lee, 2015; Leithwood et al, 2008). Within the private sector,
leading organizations prioritize leadership development and succession planning as key
improvement processes, yet it is rare for schools to even assess, let alone respond, to their future
leadership needs (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). The most innovative
schools recognize that the inevitability of leadership succession calls for an examination of the
systems that develop and sustain leadership from within their organizations (Fink & Brayman,
2004; Fullan, 2002; Hargreaves & Fink, 2004; Peters, 2011; Peters-Hawkins et al., 2018).
This work begins with collaboratively defining the skills and competencies necessary to
lead school improvement, both now and into the future. These standards can then drive the
development of tools and systems that can better predict who will succeed in the principalship
and match them with the types of experiences and professional development required to support
their preparation (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). Standards for effective
school leadership can also support the work of redesigning the role of the principal with a greater
emphasis on building leadership in others, leading to a subsequent redesign of steppingstone
roles such as the assistant principalship (Goldring et al., 2021; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011).
The absence of a clear pathway to the principalship, one in which developmental experiences are
mapped out and paired with appropriate guided support and mentorship, may begin to explain
why assistant principals often fail to fill the vacancies left by their departing principal (Bierly &
Shy, 2013; Goldring et al., 2021). This, despite the assertion from Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms
3

(2011) that schools should have at least two internal candidates ready and waiting for each
leadership position.
Beyond intentionally expanding the pool of high-quality candidates, schools also need to
manage the succession event itself which first requires an analysis of its nature. Schools that
regularly engage in the practice of assessing their current and future leadership needs are better
placed to plan the extent to which the succession event will result in a departure from current
organizational practice (Hargreaves et al., 2003). Careful assessment of the proposed entry point
of the new principal is therefore critical in developing a transition plan that facilitates an
exchange of outbound and inbound leadership knowledge that matches the intent of the
succession (Fink & Brayman, 2004).
Clarity of purpose regarding the succession event and a carefully considered transition
plan are essential elements of a principal induction process, but attention must also be given to
the process of principal socialization (Bengston et al., 2013). This requires an understanding of
organizational socialization theory so that appropriate socialization tactics may be used to elicit
responses from the incoming principal that align with the succession event objectives (Bengston
et al., 2013; Van Maanen & Schein, 1979). How schools intentionally support and develop
principals through those early stages of uncertainty and adjustment is critical in supporting them
to become highly effective within their new contexts. In fact, Parkay et al. (1992) conclude that a
principal’s eventual level of professional socialization is strongly indicated by the end of their
first year.
Mentoring is consistently highlighted throughout the literature as being an essential
element in preparing, developing, and socializing school leaders (Daresh, 2004; Liang &
Augustine-Shaw, 2016). For aspiring principals, it encourages them to consider the principalship;
4

for new principals, it is a powerful socializing strategy; while for all career stage principals, it is
an excellent source of professional development (Parylo et al., 2012). The role that mentorship
can play in improving principal induction and socialization can help to alleviate some of the
negative effects related to principal job satisfaction, self-efficacy, and retention (Barnett &
Shoho, 2017; McClellan & Casey, 2015). Those schools that are able to retain and develop their
own principals to the point where they are then ready to take on the role of mentoring and build
that leadership capacity in others, can also help to sustain and reiterate their own leadership
succession planning cycles (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011).
The purpose of this study was to explore how a high performing American international
school plans for, manages, and supports principal and assistant principal successions and to
understand how recently appointed principals and assistant principals experience their transition
into their new roles. The study helps to describe how school leaders in this context assess and
respond to their school’s present and future leadership needs at the principal and assistant
principal levels. In addition, this study also describes how the school supports the socialization of
newly appointed principals and assistant principals and provides insights as to how these recently
appointed principals and assistant principals perceived their transitions into their new roles.
Organizational Context
The American International School (AIS) is a pseudonym for a large independent, not–
for-profit school located in Southeast Asia. AIS is a preschool–12 school that provides an
American educational experience with an international perspective and strives to develop
exceptional thinkers who are prepared for their futures. The school comprises three divisions and
serves approximately 4000 students from a range of cultural backgrounds. Students are
welcomed to the elementary preschool and remain in that division through until fifth grade. The
5

middle school serves grades six through eight, with students graduating from the high school in
grade twelve. More than half of the students are U.S. citizens as measured by passport, although
this proportion has declined over the last decade. Indian passport holders are the second largest
student group and together with students holding a Chinese passport, they represent the group of
passport holders that have seen the biggest increase across the last decade. Citizens and nationals
of the host country must receive permission from their government in order to attend the school.
Although there are more than twenty different nationalities with at least ten student
representatives, that same level of diversity is not reflected in family socio-economic status, with
most students living in high socio-economic households. The school has an open enrolment
policy and accepts students with mild to moderate learning differences. English language
learners are accepted up to and including third grade. The average time that a student stays with
AIS is currently 4 years, although that number increases to 5 years for students graduating in
twelfth grade (American International School, 2020).
Students at AIS consistently deliver exceptional scores across a wide range of measures
for student achievement. In the elementary and middle school, students outperform U.S. norm
groups on the Measure of Academic Progress (MAP) standardized assessments in the areas of
language arts, math, and reading. In the high school, students’ Advanced Placement (AP) results
place the school within the top 10% of all schools administering these exams worldwide.
Similarly, the mean SAT and ACT scores for students at AIS are significantly higher than U.S.
average scores. 99% of students attend a 4-year college or university within 2 years of graduating
from AIS, with approximately 80% attending U.S. colleges. The United Kingdom and Canada
are typically the next most common post-secondary destinations (American International School,
2020).
6

Over the last decade, AIS has experienced a significant amount of change as a result of a
comprehensive research and development process that began in the 2012–13 school year under
the stewardship of a new superintendent. At that time, by traditional measures of student
achievement, SAS was an exceptional school. In 2012 for example, 95% of the 1278 AP exams
that were taken resulted in a score of 3 or more, with 45% at a score of 5, and a mean average
score of 4.16. However, the school recognized that 21
st
century competencies such as
collaboration, communication, creativity, and critical thinking were not core components of its
curriculum, assessment, and instructional practices (American International School, 2014). In
response to these concerns, AIS established a set of learning aspirations that would better support
its future oriented vision of preparing exceptional thinkers. Teams of faculty and administrators
from each division were sent to more than 80 schools across the globe to learn more about
instructional practices that were aligned to these new objectives and had a positive impact on
student learning. The resulting strategic plan focused on systemwide innovations such as
instituting professional learning communities, high-impact instructional practices, standards-
based approaches to curriculum and assessment, and student wellness. This was also
accompanied by a facilities master plan that would see a substantial redevelopment of the
school’s campus (American International School, 2017).
Leading these initiatives and managing the associated change process that comes with
innovation was not without its costs. In the 2017–18 school year, the school community
experienced a contentiously fought board election that resulted in some changes at the board
level. At the end of that same school year, the school’s superintendent announced that the 2018–
19 school year would be their last. Having conducted a community listening tour, the incoming
superintendent announced the new strategic plan during the 2020–21 school year. It is worth
7

noting that many of the trajectories of those earlier initiatives and innovations were still
preserved, including the campus upgrade which began during the summer of 2021 (American
International School, 2021).
This year the high school has experienced its fourth principal succession within a 9-year
period. Two of the four members of the high school administration team are new this year, with
the other two having only served one year as a deputy principal in the 2020–21 school year.
Although two of the current deputy principals were hired internally from teacher leader
positions, it is not inaccurate to suggest that this team has experienced a significant loss of
institutional leadership memory. In contrast, up until this year, the middle school administration
team has remained the same since the 2015–16 school year. This team change is a result of a new
deputy principal position being added to both the middle and high school to address the
additional leadership demands associated with the campus upgrade. Each of the four members of
the current middle school leadership team has been hired internally having served in another
position at AIS. However next year, this middle school leadership team will experience
significant change, with both the current principal and an experienced assistant principal
departing AIS. A current assistant principal has been internally promoted to lead this division,
with the two remining assistant principal roles to be filled by one internally promoted
instructional coach, and externally hired candidate with principal experience.
As AIS continues the work of implementing its new strategic plan against the backdrop
of a comprehensive campus upgrade, principals and assistant principals need clarity on how their
roles will need to evolve so that they may prioritize their time in ways that optimize this change
process for the communities they serve. The last decade at AIS has shown that significant school
reform is possible, yet as Hargreaves and Fink (2004) explain, sustaining such school
8

improvement efforts is highly dependent upon the organization’s ability to develop human
capital and sustain school leadership from within. Similarly, the past decade at AIS has
highlighted the inevitability of leadership succession. Within the high school context, this is
especially true at the level of the principal and assistant principal, with seven new assistant
principals and four new principals over the past 9 years.
Statement of the Problem
While there is limited research examining the impacts of principal turnover within an
international school context, U.S. research has shown increases in principal turnover negatively
impact student achievement, teacher retention, and school climate (Bartanen et al, 2019; Grissom
et al., 2021; Miller, 2013). Approximately 20% of U.S. principals leave their posts each year
(Goldring & Taie, 2018) and their tenures continue to get shorter, with the average dropping
from 6.2 to 4 years from 1988 through to 2016 (Grissom et al., 2021). At the same time, the
international school market continues to grow at a rapid pace. According to research from ISC
(2017) the number of English medium international schools around the world as of May 2017
was 8712. By June 2021 this number had risen to approximately 12300 schools serving an
estimated 5.6 million students (ISC, 2021). As the international school market continues to grow,
so too does the demand for effective international school principals. If the accelerating trend of
U.S. based principal turnover and the corresponding patterns of shortened tenures are mimicked
by schools within an international school context, then there are several key questions for these
schools to consider. First, how can international schools ensure a steady supply of effective
school principals within the unique contexts in which they operate? Second, how can
international schools quickly and effectively position their new principals to embark upon a
successful principalship? The importance of managing the principal succession process is
9

especially pertinent in light of the continued alignment within the literature that highlights
principal effects as so integral for improving outcomes for students (Leithwood et al., 2004;
Grissom et al., 2021).
Purpose of the Study
With widespread acknowledgement for the impact of principal effects on student
outcomes (Grissom et al., 2021), and the continued acceleration of principal turnover, a steady
supply of high-quality principal leadership is necessary to sustain school improvement efforts
(Bierly & Shy, 2013; Hargreaves & Fink, 2004; Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Lee, 2015;
Leithwood et al, 2008). While much has been written about how organizations assess and
respond to their present and future leadership needs through the process of succession planning
and management (Hargreaves et al., 2003; Peters-Hawkins et al., 2018; Rothwell, 2010;
Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011), there has been limited research within the international school
context. How principals are socialized into their new roles has also been well documented
throughout the literature (Barnett & Shoho, 2017; Bengston et al., 2013; Crow, 2006; Hart 1993;
Parkay et al., 1992), but again, there is little known about the socialization and supports that
facilitate successful principalships in an international school context. The purpose of this study
was to therefore explore how AIS plans for, manages, and supports principal and assistant
principal successions and to understand how recently appointed principals and assistant
principals experience their transition into their new roles. The study was guided by the following
research questions:
1. How does AIS plan for leadership succession at the principal and assistant principal
level?
10

2. How does AIS support the socialization of newly appointed principals and assistant
principals?
3. How do newly appointed principals and assistant principals at AIS experience the
transition into their new roles?
Proposed Conceptual Framework
A conceptual framework serves as an underlying set of theories and concepts that help
develop a study (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). They are guided by beliefs,
experiences, prior research and literature (Maxwell, 2012), and provide a lens through which
phenomena may be explored (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The conceptual framework illustrated
in Figure 1 was informed by research in the areas of effective school leadership at the level of the
principal, leading within the international school context, succession planning in education, and
managing the process of principal succession, all of which play a role in influencing how schools
onboard and support new principals through principal induction and socialization.

Figure 1
Proposed Conceptual Framework

11

For schools to assess their present and future leadership needs at the level of the
principal, they must first understand the significance of principal leadership as it relates to school
outcomes. Why do effective principals matter? How do principals impact school and student
outcomes? What are the pathways through which their effects are mediated? And what are the
skills and competencies that drive effective principals’ performance? It follows that schools must
also consider the factors that contribute to principal turnover and its impact on school outcomes.
An understanding of why effective principals are important, and how they operationalize
their effectiveness, must also be informed by careful consideration of the international school
setting. How does the context of the international school shape conceptions of what it means to
be an effective principal leader? What are the skills and competencies that help international
school principals effectively enact their roles? And what are the unique leadership challenges
posed within these settings? Keller (2015) speaks to the challenge of navigating dualities
presented within these complex and highly diverse sites; a sentiment that is echoed by Gardner-
McTaggart (2018) who speaks to the tension in balancing the common place equity focused
mission with an underlying community understanding of success expressed as a function of elite
university acceptance. The issue of community transience can also be heightened within the
international school communities, leading to challenges in managing the change process as a
result of teacher turnover, which can subsequently induce further leadership succession
(Morrison, 2018).
In responding to changes in principal leadership, Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms (2011) call
for schools to follow the private sector’s lead in shifting from a replacement-oriented culture, to
one in which schools actively engage in the process of succession planning; defined by Rothwell
(2010) as the “process of developing talent to meet the needs of the organization now and in the
12

future” (p. 331). This work begins with clearly defined leadership standards that provide clarity
on the skills and competencies necessary to drive the school’s objectives (Bierly & Shy, 2013;
Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011; Syed, 2015; Turnbull et al., 2013). The development of these
standards will be informed by the school’s conception of effective principal leadership which is
interpreted through the lens of operating within an international school context. These standards
can then drive how the school approaches the process of talent identification and development;
processes that are again filtered through the nuances of the international school setting.
Researchers have highlighted the assistant principal as an underutilized resource in
ensuring a steady supply of effective principals, arguing that the role should be reconceived in
terms of principal preparation (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Goldring et al., 2021; Schmidt-Davis &
Bottoms, 2011). Like any organization engaged in the development of its future leaders,
internationals schools must weigh that investment against the reality that it might fail to pay
dividends within the boundaries of their schools. How the roles of assistant principals are
defined, and how their development is supported, can therefore provide some insight as to the
school’s approach to succession planning. It is for this reason that both principals and assistant
principals have been chosen as participants in this study.
Managing the process of principal succession speaks to the level of organizational
involvement in positioning the new leader to be successful, with unplanned principal succession
having the potential to significantly undermine school improvement efforts (Fink & Brayman,
2004; Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Lee, 2015). This requires an analysis of the
entry point of the new leader which will be influenced by the degree to which the succession is
planned; the extent to which the new leader will be expected to depart from current practice;
together with a range of other incoming leader characteristics that include career stage, level of
13

professional and organizational socialization, in additional to all the other factors that might
influence how the new leader transitions to life outside the professional self. Figure 1 also shows
the cycle closing with a return to effective principal leadership, to imply that the goal of
managing principal succession is the practical enactment of that previously defined standard for
effective principal leadership.
How the school supports the new leader to move from their initial entry point to the
actualization of the school’s understanding of effective principal leadership, is guided by the
process of principal induction and socialization. Bengston et al. (2013) consider induction to be
systemic and planned approaches used to control the process of organizational socialization that
often involves mentoring. It is the core focus of this study and is presented at the heart of this
conceptual framework. It is the interplay between this process and the four outer elements that
will help to address this study’s research purpose and questions. For example, the school’s
approach to developing its own school leaders through succession planning might expand the
time frame available to engage in organizational and professional socialization tactics. The
degree to which any induction process is perceived as successful by the participants, might
influence future organizational approaches to both succession planning and management. While
it is anticipated that the school’s conception of effective principal leadership will serve as guide
for the induction and socialization process, it is also possible that in engaging with this process,
the new leader is able to influence this community understanding in ways that are not
predictable. The flexibility inherent within this conceptual framework aligns with the exploratory
nature of qualitative research, in which study designs are often emergent, built with the capacity
to evolve and respond to the inevitable unpredictability inherent in capturing reality rooted in
human behavior (Locke et al, 2010).
14

Definition of Terms
Inbound knowledge is defined by Hargreaves and Goodson (2006) as “the knowledge of
leadership of a particular school that is needed to change it” (p. 19)
Induction is considered by Bengston et al (2013) to be a process that involves systemic
and planned approaches to control the process of organizational socialization, explaining that a
successful implementation of an induction process often involves mentoring, and is dependent
upon knowledge of organizational socialization theory.
Insider knowledge is defined by Hargreaves and Goodson (2006) as “the knowledge one
gains from and exercises with other members of the community after becoming known, trusted,
and accepted” (p. 19).
Outbound knowledge is defined by Hargreaves and Goodson (2006) as “the knowledge
needed to preserve past successes” (p. 19).
Organizational socialization is the process by which one is taught “how things are done
here” and “learns the ropes” of a particular organizational role (Crow, 2006; Van Maanen &
Schein, 1979). It is a process that is largely contextual, is contingent on organizational culture,
and is focused on transitioning from the outsider to insider trajectory (Bengston et al., 2013).
Organizational socialization theory is founded on the assumptions that organizations can
and do influence the socialization of new employees, and that these employees respond to such
tactics in one of three ways: custodianship whereby the status quo of the current role and mission
is maintained; content innovation which involves a change in how knowledge and strategies are
applied to maintain the mission of the role; and role innovation which leads to a redefining of the
purpose of the role (Van Maanen & Schein, 1979).
15

Personal socialization involves the change in self-identity as people learn and establish
themselves in new roles (Crow, 2006). Normore (2004) refers to this as resocialization which
occurs as new leaders renegotiate their personal identities as a result of climbing the professional
ladder.
Principal succession is the leadership transition process that results from the departure of
one principal and the arrival of another (Hargreaves et al., 2003, as cited by Aravena, 2020)
Professional socialization refers to the process of acquiring the knowledge, skills and
dispositions necessary to enact a professional role regardless of setting (Crow, 2006; Normore,
2004; Parkay et al., 1992).
Stepping-stone roles refer to points along the leadership continuum towards the
principalship such as grade-level chair, department chair, instructional coach, curriculum
specialist, and most prominently, the role of assistant principal (Bierly & Shy, 2013, Goldring et
al., 2021)
Succession planning is defined by Rothwell (2010) as the “process of developing talent to
meet the needs of the organization now and in the future” (p. 331).
The pathway to the principalship is a leadership continuum that begins for many
educators in teacher leadership roles such as grade-level chair, department chair, instructional
coach, curriculum specialist, and most prominently, the role of assistant principal (Bierly & Shy,
2013, Goldring et al., 2021).

16

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Over the past two decades, studies have highlighted the importance of school leadership
on student outcomes (Branch et al., 2013; Hallinger & Heck, 1996; Leithwood et al., 2004;
Waters et al., 2003) with more recent research arguing that effective school principals may be
more important than previous work had suggested (Grissom et al., 2021). At the same time,
worrying trends such as increased principal turnover, reduced levels of principal experience, and
shortening principal tenures have also emerged within the U.S. context (Goldring & Taie, 2018;
Grissom et al, 2021; Levin et al., 2020). As a result, schools need to establish ways in which they
can intentionally expand the pool of high-quality principal applicants with Bierly and Shy (2013)
noting that “developing and putting in place more transformational school leaders is among the
clearest and most effective ways to create a high number of exceptional schools” (p. 4).
This literature review will first examine why principals matter and what effective
leadership at the principal level looks like. It will then take a closer look at the issues
surrounding principal turnover, attempting to uncover some of the impacts on school outcomes
while also examining some of its causes. The review will then explore the international school
literature and take a closer look at school leadership in these contexts, with specific reference to
the challenges of navigating dualities and operating within transient communities. Having
highlighted the importance of principal leadership and the issues surrounding leadership
turnover, the review will then turn its attention to exploring how schools can respond to their
present and future leadership needs through succession planning, emphasizing the assistant
principal as a key steppingstone role. Finally, the review will take a closer look at how schools
can manage the process of principal succession to quickly position its new school leaders to be
successful through principal induction, socialization, and mentorship.
17

Why Principals Matter
In the early part of this century, Leithwood et al. (2004) concluded that leadership is
second only to classroom instruction among all school-related factors that contribute to what
students learn at school. In their recent analysis of principal effectiveness as measured by student
achievement, Grissom et al. (2021) agree, stating that principals are “as important as previous
reports have suggested, in fact, their importance may not have been stated strongly enough” (p.
91). There in now widespread consensus that leadership at the level of the school principal can
have a significant impact on school outcomes (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Grissom et al, 2021; Levin et
al., 2020) with the highest quality principals driving the most lasting school improvement efforts
(Branch & Hanushek, 2012; Grissom et al, 2021).
One of the challenges in capturing principal effectiveness is the fact that there are a
multitude of pathways through which these principal effects on student achievement are
mediated. These include impacts on classroom instruction, school climate, hiring and retention of
teachers, and resource management (Branch et al., 2013; Grissom et al., 2021; Hallinger & Heck,
1996; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2000). Consequently, large samples of principals and schools are
required to statistically identify principal effects and distinguish them from other factors that
affect student achievement (Grissom et al., 2021). Capturing the timing of principal effects is a
challenge, with some initiatives requiring multi-year studies before changes in student outcomes
are seen. There are also concerns around internal, with that many of the studies to date developed
using correlational designs (Grissom et al., 2021). Despite these concerns, there is continued
alignment in the literature that cultivating, selecting, preparing, and supporting a high-quality
principal workforce offers some of the highest return on investment with respect to student
outcomes (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Grissom et al, 2021; Levin et al., 2020).
18

A Closer Look at Principal Effects on School Outcomes
Branch et al. (2013) explain their approach to estimating individual principal
effectiveness was an extension their earlier work in measuring teachers’ “value added” with the
approach being applied to the whole school. The research team measured average gains in
achievement, adjusted for individual student and school characteristics, and compared across
principals, both in different schools and in the same school at different points in time. Grissom et
al. (2021) combined this study with five other rigorous U.S. based studies for a total data set of
more than 22000 principals across four states and two urban school districts. These authors
found that a one standard deviation increase in principal effectiveness increased the typical
student achievement by 0.13 standard deviations in math, and 0.09 standard deviations in reading
(Grissom et al. (2021). These authors also express their findings by comparing principals at the
25th and 75th percentile of principal effectiveness stating that such a gap would yield an extra
2.9 months of learning in math and 2.7 months in reading. To put this in perspective, the
improvement in math is larger than two-thirds of all the educational interventions measured in a
recent study by Kraft (2020), while the improvement in reading is greater than half of such
interventions. When Grissom et al (2021) compared the principal effects with estimates of
teacher impact from Hanushek and Rivkin (2010), the results were very similar, and given the
significantly larger span of influence for a principal, they conclude that the most efficient way to
improve student achievement is an investment in the principal.
Studies have also shown that effective principals have positive measurable effects on
other outcomes such as graduation rates (Coelli & Green, 2012), absenteeism (Bartanen, 2020),
discipline (Bacher-Hicks et al., 2019), teacher turnover (Béteille et al., 2012), and teacher
perceptions of school climate (Grissom et al. 2018). There is evidence to suggest these effects
19

are greater when principals are given enough time to make their mark (Coelli & Green, 2012;
Miller, 2013), further emphasizing the importance of reducing principal turnover and
implementing supports for stability in the role (Levin et al., 2020). Finally, it should be noted
that many of the studies contributing to the current literature of principle effects on student
outcomes are black box studies, meaning that they are able to establish a link between principal
performance and school outcomes, but struggle to provide information on the nature of strong or
weak principal performance (Grissom et al., 2021).
Characteristics of an Effective Principal
While there are many labels used throughout the literature to highlight different styles of
school leadership, Leithwood et al. (2004) argue that these stem from two core elements critical
to any organization’s effectiveness: establishing a defensible set of objectives and the ability to
mobilize people towards those ends. In their meta-analysis of 30 years of research, Waters et al.
(2003) identified intellectual stimulation, situational awareness, change agent, culture, and
stakeholder outreach as the five leadership responsibilities with the greatest effect on student
achievement. Leithwood et al (2008) argued that school leader effects on student outcomes were
most powerfully mediated through staff motivation, commitment, and working conditions and
that the most exceptional school leaders draw on the same repertoire of the following four core
leadership practices: building vision and setting directions; understanding and developing
people; redesigning the organization; and managing the teaching and learning program. A
modification of this framework will guide the following discussion.
Building Vision and Setting Directions
People are motivated by goals they find personally compelling and suitably challenging,
but great leaders also know how to support people to find meaning in their work, generating a
20

sense of identity and moral purpose along the way (Bolman & Deal, 2017; Leithwood et al,
2004; Leithwood & Jantzi, 2005; Fullan, 2007). Effective school principals are skilled
communicators who develop a common language around learning, a shared understanding of
organizational activities and goals, (Hallinger & Heck, 2002; Hill, 2018) and can clearly
articulate how their proposed ideal state relates to improved outcomes for students (Leithwood et
al, 2004).
Understanding and Developing People
One of the central goals of leadership is to help build capacity for improved employee
performance (Heifetz et al, 2009a; Leithwood et al, 2008). This requires a deep
understanding of the relationship between employee performance and employee
beliefs, values, motivation, skills, and knowledge, as well as their working conditions
(Leithwood et al, 2008). Great leaders know how to tap into the human dimension and create an
environment where the natural skill sets of people can develop and flourish (Heifetz et al, 2009a;
Morrison, 2018).
To do this work well, effective principals orient their work towards instructionally
focused interactions with teachers (Fuller et al., 2018; Grissom et al., 2021; Hausman et al.,
2002), providing expertise in high-quality instruction and offering feedback and support through
regular observations and coaching (City et al, 2009; Fuller et al., 2018; Johnson et al. 2011). The
current emphasis on the principal as an instructional leader is nothing new. Leithwood et al.
(2004) had stressed its importance as it related to student achievement yet expressed concern that
although many school leaders were urged to engage in the practice of instructional leadership,
few had clarity as to what that entailed. More recent data on how principals and assistant
principals are spending their time does appear to show that instructional leadership is now a clear
21

focus that is paying dividends (Searby et al., 2017; Goldring et al., 2021). There is also evidence
that suggests teacher effectiveness can predict future principal effectiveness (Goldhaber et al.,
2019), which could have implications for school leaders looking to identify future leadership
talent within their schools (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Goldring et al., 2021; Syed, 2015).
While there is a growing expectation that principals should play an active role in
developing the leadership capacities in others (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Goldring et al., 2021; Syed,
2015), it is often not explicitly stated in principal job descriptions and there has been little
research conducted as to their effectiveness in supporting such development (Goldring et al.,
2021). Studies have shown an increased level of diffused leadership in schools (Spillane et al.
2007) but there are concerns that the work that principals delegate down is more managerial and
administrative in nature (Genda & Hackmann, 2014). Recent research from Goldring et al.
(2021) argues that the assistant principal role should be redesigned with a greater emphasis on
instructional leadership in preparation for the principalship, and that principals should be more
intentional about designing the work to align with this purpose.
Building a Productive School Climate
In addition to building capacity, high-impact principals also look to build productive
school climates centered on trust, efficacy, and teamwork so they may facilitate the kind of
courageous conversations necessary to sustain continuous school improvement efforts (Grissom
et al, 2021). Brown and Wynn (2007) found that principals that offered proactive support to new
teachers but also demonstrated a commitment to the success of both new and veteran teachers
had higher teacher retention rates. Similarly, principals that demonstrate their effectiveness in
high-growth schools were found to be better at retaining high-performing teachers (Loeb et al
2012). Grissom et al. (2021) argue that not all teacher attrition is bad and can provide an
22

opportunity to bring in new ideas and greater levels of teacher effectiveness. They also caution
against formal administration approaches and instead advocate for counselling out poorly
performing teachers. Part of the reason again relates to school climate and the importance of trust
and collegial relationships, which Morrison (2018) identifies as essential if people are to feel
empowered to adopt a mindset of continuous improvement. Moye et al. (2005) also note this
connection and report that teachers who felt empowered to work had higher degrees of trust with
their principal. Provisions of autonomy through distributed leadership was similarly suggested by
Hollingwork et al. (2018) as an effective means to build trust. Interestingly, Hitt and Player
(2018) found that novice principals were less likely to report distributing leadership though no
connection to a lack of trust was offered as a potential cause.
Redesigning the Organization
Principals primarily contribute to student outcomes indirectly through their influence of
people and features of the organization, with these linkages getting longer as the scale of the
organization increases (Leithwood et al, 2004). The expanding role of the principal, and the
increasing complexity of the work involved has been well documented (Bierly & Shy, 2013;
Bush, 2012; Grissom et al, 2021; Schleicher, 2012). Principals now need to make informed
decisions about how to re-prioritize their time, recognizing that some choices will pay off more
than others (Leithwood et al, 2004; Morrison, 2018). As a result, there is now significant support
within the literature for models of distributed leadership (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Hargreaves &
Fink, 2012; Heifetz et al, 2009b; Leithwood et al, 2004; Leithwood et al, 2008; Spillane et al.,
2007).
Distributive leadership models offer greatest value when they facilitate the development
of future leadership capacity within the organization (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Goldring et al., 2021;
23

Hargreaves & Fink, 2012; Syed, 2015). However, in the shorter term they can also help to
mobilize a higher proportion of workers to take responsible risks, engage in experimentation, and
reorient themselves with a greater sense of ownership in generating solutions (Heifetz et al,
2009b). Unfortunately, the literature suggests there is still work to be done in reimagining
traditional steppingstone roles, such as the assistant principal, so that these positions provide a
broad range of stretch assignments that are oriented towards future school leadership (Bierly &
Shy, 2013; Goldring et al., 2021).
Facilitating productive collaboration through professional learning communities that
engage with data is another hallmark of an effective principalship (Anderson et al, 2010;
Grissom et al., 2021). These principals analyze a range of data sets to establish organizational
goals, and strategically determine how to optimize resource allocation to attain their objectives
(Finnigan 2012; Lorton 2013). However, Anderson et al (2010) express concern that too often
school leaders fail to move from the problem identification stage to the problem-solving stage.
They also caution leaders to refrain from “single-loop learning” (p. 324), in which current
understandings and practices are refined without the interrogation of underlying assumptions.
This is of particular importance since principals of high-growth schools have been shown to
strategically distribute resources with a greater focus on equity (Grissom et al., 2021; Loeb et al.
2012).
The potential for data to have an impact will always be limited by the modes used to
collect it. Principals must be able to distinguish high from low-quality practices for the educators
they evaluate in order to establish meaningful variation in the data they generate (Grissom &
Loeb, 2017; Folsom et al., 2015). Turnbull et al. (2015) note that 40% of assistant principals in
the six principal pipeline districts in their study stated that the evaluation process did not help
24

inform their professional practice. Folsom et al. (2015) report in their research that 96% of
assistant principals were rated as either effective or highly effective. This checklist approach to
post-observation feedback and performance evaluations is highlighted by Grissom et al. (2021)
as a leadership practice that the research weighs against, with classroom walk-throughs that are
focused on monitoring and the principal’s own visibility also considered to be low impact.
The Impacts of Principal Turnover
Approximately 20% of principals in the United States leave their schools each year
(Goldring & Taie, 2018; Miller, 2013) with about half of those principals leaving the
principalship altogether (Goldring & Taie, 2018). This turnover has been shown to negatively
impact student achievement, teacher retention, and school climate, and is higher in more
disadvantaged schools, further perpetuating opportunity gaps (Bartanen et al, 2019; Béteille et al,
2012; Grissom et al., 2021). Grissom et al. (2021) note that from 1988 through to 2016 the
average tenure of a U.S. public school principal dropped from 6.2 to 4 years, with the average
level of experience falling from 10 to 7 years across the same time frame. Again, this trend is
more pronounced in high-need schools. These continued changes in principal leadership often
derail school improvement efforts, making it difficult to build capacity and sustain meaningful
change in schools (Gardner-McTaggart, 2018; Levin et al., 2020).
Miller (2013) reports that student achievement typically declines with the initial principal
departure and continues to fall in the first 2 years of the new principal’s tenure before rising over
the next three. This author’s research also shows that 5 years after the installation of a new
principal there appears to be no difference in student achievement when compared to 5 years
before. Hargreaves et al. (2003) suggests that frequent principal succession results in less
community and teacher support for the new leader, with other studies also highlighting a drop in
25

school climate ratings that correlate with principal turnover (Bartanen et al, 2019; Beteille et al,
2012). Some studies show that the impacts on student achievement are mitigated when the
replacement principal is more experienced or effective (Bartaen et al, 2019; Betielle et al, 2012),
which could suggest that it is not the turnover but the loss of leadership skills, and the impact on
organizational climate that disrupts student learning (Grissom et al, 2021).
Levin et al. (2020) identified five key areas of focus from their research for school
systems to support a stronger principalships which are principal working conditions; equitable
compensation; developing helpful systems for principal feedback, evaluation, and mentoring;
appropriate decision-making autonomy; and increased access to professional development.
Beyond the impact of principal effects on school outcomes, they also point out the immense cost
associated with principal turnover, further emphasizing the importance of their findings.
Goldring et al. (2021) argue that investing in the capacity of the assistant principals can help to
reduce both teacher attrition and principal attrition, through their contributions to school climate,
leadership, and hence the working conditions for both teachers and principals. Having a steady
stream of high-quality internal candidates can also help to mitigate against some of the flaws in
recruitment processes. With high levels of principal turnover also constraining the pool of high-
quality applicants, Bierly and Shy (2013) point out that poorly preforming principals continue to
be renewed, with recruitment processes often blind to past performance because school systems
are not defining and capturing the data they need to make good decisions. How schools identify
and respond to their present and future leadership needs will be the focus the latter part of this
review.
26

Leading in an International School Context
Gardner-McTaggart (2018) defines international schools as “autonomous, private bodies
that cater to the globally advantaged” (p. 148), choosing to further categorize this market as
international and globally mobile families as well as the upwardly mobile local-national families.
Keung and Rockinson-Szapkiw (2013) agree and further define these schools as serving transient
communities with high turnover of student families and staff, high levels of cultural diversity in
both staff and students, and multiple constituents involved in the students’ educational
endeavors. They also explain that schools are situated in a local host culture that is often very
different to that of both the school and the home country of its students. To effectively lead these
schools and meet the needs of their diverse communities, leaders must draw upon a broad range
of skills. Research from Morrison (2018) suggests these should include high levels of integrity
and ethics, good communication, approachability, not to mention “adaptability, coping with
ambiguity, creativity, empathy, flexibility, good judgement, optimism, perseverance, resilience,
and a sense of humour to keep everything in perspective” (p. 517).
Hill (2018) reminds us of the importance of the international school leader’s
communicative competency as it relates to the development of a positive organizational culture,
but also highlights the value of cultural competence in understanding community values and
beliefs, as it is these (and not facts) that will determine how people behave. This need to balance
the goals of the organization with the undercurrents of public opinion, acting politically as well
as analytically is echoed by Heifitz et al. (2009a) who argue the importance of looking beyond
the merits of any issue so that leaders may understand the interests, fears, and loyalties of the
factions that have formed around it.
27

Developing an inclusive decision-making process, one in which the leader is perceived to
be impartial (Hill, 2018), is everything according to Morrison (2018), who explains that people
can support most outcomes so long as the process leads them to believe that intelligent decisions
have been made. This author’s mixed methods study of international school leaders found that
being visionary, being committed to school staff, and creating a collegial supportive work
environment, were the leadership characteristics most frequently associated with effective
change in international schools. Without these high levels of emotional intelligence, a leader
cannot begin to sell the problem and make the current status quo seem more dangerous than
launching into the perceived unknown, especially when the destination requires a significant
departure from past practices (Heifetz et al, 2009b; Morrison, 2018).
Context, Policy and Culture
Successful schools situate themselves within the broader social context and ensure that
the values that drive their work align with the tenets of social justice (Walker & Dimmock,
2005). Gardner-McTaggart (2018) explains that a focus on equity in mission and values is also
commonplace in the world of private international schools but cautions that success at such
schools is often a function of their ability to “confer credentials that facilitate entry into elite
universities” (p. 150). Navigating this tension between the marketplace and the equitable, while
developing a vision that is not some elusive entity divorced from the day-to-day activities of the
school, is a significant undertaking (Morrison, 2018). It requires school leaders to be skilled
communicators who can balance short-term goals with long-term objectives and engender a
sense of progress toward a place that diverse communities are excited to move towards (Hill,
2018; Morrison, 2018).
28

The organizational context in which principals are located influences the ways in which
they operationalize their effectiveness (Leithwood et al, 2004; Grissom et al., 2021). In reality,
being a large U.S. secondary school principal really does require a different combination of skills
to those required to lead a small international elementary school in Bangkok. Beyond the
structural and cultural components, there is also the policy context, and for an international
school that might mean policies within the host country, in addition to national policies of
majoritarian groups within the school community. Over the past 2 decades in the United States
the transition from the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) to the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
era has required multiple recalibrations of the principal’s role, influencing how they spend their
time, and how they allocate resources (Grissom et al., 2017; Grissom et al., 2021; Dee et al.,
2013). For international schools recruiting principals directly from this lived experience, it is
natural that they will bring some of those conceptions of the role with them. In fact, there are
multiple ways in which the effects of significant national policies can be channeled into the
fabric of international school life, and it is sometimes necessary for principals to act as a buffer
against the broader policy implications within their context (LeChausseur et al, 2018). For
example, Rigby et al, (2020) highlight the potential dangers of increased accountability measures
and incentives in schools arguing that such policies can compromise instructional efforts directed
toward deep understanding in favor of standardized test preparation.
The reality that the principal inherits is entwined with the school history and culture that
precedes them (Morrison, 2018). Failing to understand and harness the various cultural beliefs
through a lack of cross-cultural competence can quickly derail change efforts and undermine the
tenure of the principal (Abrams & Gibbs, 2000; Hill, 2018; Walker & Dimmock, 2005).
Familiarity with culture and context is perhaps why principal candidates who apply to schools at
29

which they have previously taught receive significantly more job offers (Buckman et al., 2018).
Principals who had previously served as assistant principals in the same school report that their
familiarity with context and their existing relationships with the community enabled them to
quickly implement their vision for the school (Caruso, 2013; Lee, 2015). While a lack of
awareness of community priorities has the capacity to derail any change initiative, being overly
respectful can result in the principal being absorbed into the current status quo (Morrison, 2018).
Managing such tensions in certainly not uncommon in an international school setting.
Navigating Dualities
The expansion of the international school market has coincided with increased levels of
globalization. While this has its economic advantages, there are also disadvantages in terms of
social justice, cultural imperialism, and even environmental degradation (Keller, 2015). This
poses further coherence problems for the vast majority of international schools with the equity-
focused mission commonplace today (Gardner-McTaggart, 2018). Leaders in an international
school setting are continually required to confront the multifaceted nature of issues within their
community, acknowledging the reality that for each truth, there is an equal and opposing truth
(Kaplan & Kaiser, 2003). It takes skilled and principled leaders to help guide communities to do
the same (Keller, 2015). Part of that work is about establishing community values; a shared
terminology through which to filter decisions and negotiate acceptable conduct. However,
without a critical lens, those most in power will continue to have their values most often
represented (Hill, 2018).
Keller (2015) offers a framework for critically analyzing and managing the complex
ambiguity of dualities that challenge international school leaders. The author characterizes these
dualities as temporal and spatial, requiring the leader to bridge gateways across eras and cultures
30

respectively. The first stage of the framework adapts Simkins’ (2005) sense-making agenda for
leaders in an international school context to include conceptions of leadership, role and purpose
of the organization, changing roles of leadership, distribution of power, and understanding across
professional boundaries. The second stage focuses on reframing the leadership challenge using
the structural, political, human resource, and symbolic frames from Bolman and Deal (2017).
The suggestion is not that such complex dualities may be conveniently addressed in two parts,
but instead, this is offered as a tool that promotes pausing to truly make sense of issues at play in
such paradoxical contexts. The leader can then begin to address the issues by weighing solutions
that have been constructed through the four frames from Bolman and Deal (2017).
Situational awareness has long been a highly prized leadership asset (Waters et al., 2003)
but sensitivity to context does not mean that qualitatively different core practices are used in
every instance. Instead, the context will dictate the right combination of practices; those that
should be prioritized and those should be tempered; and striking the right balance is what the
leader must attend to (Leithwood et al, 2008). Within a diverse community, with multiple
epistemologies, values, and cultural beliefs, conducting this orchestra of practices is an ongoing
endeavor to which the leader must be finely attuned (Hill, 2018).
The Challenges of Transience
Gardner-McTaggart (2019) states that the average tenure for an English government head
of school is 9–10 years, as compared to 3.7 years (Benson, 2011) for an international school
head, suggesting regular changes in board structure (due to community transience) and board
micromanagement as potential reasons for turnover. The author also points out that international
school hotspots such as Singapore can succumb to more market-based mentalities that contribute
to higher degrees of narcissism in school leaders as they look to push their own change agendas.
31

The result being a sense of organizational amnesia due to repeated turnover of powerful
individualistic heads, each reinventing the school within their own value set.
In a survey of 281 international school teachers, Odlan and Ruzicka (2009) found that the
primary reason for teacher turnover was issues with school leadership. This might help to explain
why Morrison (2018) places such emphasis on the human dimensions for international school
leaders wishing to implement successful change efforts. Opportunities for feedback from staff;
building relationships centered on trust; and learning the school culture were outlined as
priorities in this research. Lack of consistency as a result of high teacher turnover (Gardner-
McTaggart, 2018), which in turn is related to teacher perceptions of supportive school leadership
(Mancuso et al, 2010), is perhaps why collegial and empowerment models of leadership are
consistently promoted within the limited international school literature (Gardner-McTaggart,
2018; Keung & Rockinson-Szapkiw; Mancuso et al, 2010; Morrison, 2018). Such models require
high degrees of involvement which can be a challenge in high turnover environments. This might
make the switch to a more transactional style more appealing and pragmatic. However, Gardner-
McTaggart, (2018) suggests that this can lead to political groupings, resulting in the potential for
more teacher attrition and hence a continuation of the cycle of transience.
These challenges of teacher turnover make it especially difficult to sustain school change
efforts, with Morrison (2018) noting that international school communities can be particularly
resistant, explaining that failure in managing the change process as a key determinant for
leadership turnover. With the role of international school leadership evolving to encompass such
high levels of complexity, finding an optimal leadership match is a huge challenge for school
boards around the world. In fact, Roberts and Mancuso (2014) describe the process of searching
for a new international school head as one that is like “looking for God on a good day” (p. 103).
32

How schools engage with the process of planning and managing leadership succession will now
become the focus of this review,
Succession Planning in Education
Failing to plan for a change in leadership is one of the most common sources for derailing
school improvement efforts (Hargreaves & Fink, 2004; Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Lee,
2015; Leithwood et al, 2008). With widespread acknowledgement for the impact of principal
effects on student outcomes (Grissom et al., 2021), and the continued acceleration of principal
succession, Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms (2011) explain that a steady supply of quality school
leadership is necessary, and that a more objective, and transparent succession planning process is
the solution. Most leading organizations prioritize leadership development and succession
planning as key improvement processes (Bierly & Shy, 2013), yet it is rare for school systems to
accurately anticipate their next leadership vacancy, and rarer still to have a qualified internal
candidate ready to assume the role (Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). Cieminski (2018)
highlights the importance of building internal leadership capacity to combat the challenges of an
unexpected event. Given the current context of a global pandemic this assertion certainly
resonates, but too often it is the very shackles of crisis management that inhibit schools’ ability
to properly plan for their future leadership needs (Hargreaves, 2005).
Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms (2011) call for schools to follow the private sector’s lead in
shifting from a replacement-oriented culture, to one in which schools develop their own
leadership, arguing that at least two internal candidates should be ready and waiting for each
leadership position. To do this, schools need to take a more future oriented approach with their
planning (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Parfitt, 2017). When comparing
the public and private sectors, Hargreaves et al. (2003) note that the private sector views
33

succession planning as an asset; is proactive in defining future leadership aptitudes; less passive
in their recruitment; and has a more intentional approach to human capital development and
succession management. Bierly and Shy (2013) point out the disconnect between the current
hiring process in schools and performance management, which they attribute to the absence of
effective evaluations systems driven by leadership standards and competencies.
The inevitability of leadership succession, and its potential disruption, calls for an
examination of the systems that develop and sustain leadership from within the organization
(Fink & Brayman, 2004; Fullan, 2002; Hargreaves & Fink, 2004; Peters, 2011; Peters-Hawkins
et al., 2018). Hargreaves and Fink (2004) define sustained leadership in terms of success over
time through a culture of sustained learning that develops human capital and develops the
leadership of others. Peters (2011) suggests that sustained leadership reframes organizational
change as a group process, with responsibilities and leadership distributed, debunking the
traditional notion of the heroic or charismatic leader. Transforming a school system with this end
in mind is a multiyear commitment, and principals who can lead such change efforts are not
easily recruited, especially on short notice (Bierly & Shy, 2013).
The process of succession planning is informed by both the organization’s present and
future needs, and is dynamic, non-linear, and cyclical (Hargreaves et al., 2003; Peters-Hawkins
et al., 2018; Rothwell, 2010; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). Recognizing the need for each
process to be responsive to its own organizational context, there are some common features that
emerge from the literature. These include clearly defined standards for leadership; systems for
talent identification and development; leadership development through purposefully designed
roles and placements; onboarding, support and mentorship; evaluation and process improvement;
and actively developing leadership in others (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Goldring et al., 2021;
34

Rothwell, 2010; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). The process of succession planning is often
presented as a cycle and reiterates when the new leader is actively generating leadership in
others, with some scholars advocating for leaders to be held responsible for developing their
future successors (Fullan, 2007; Goldring et al., 2021; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011; Zepeda
et al., 2012). With the current demands of the principalship considered by many to be
overwhelming (Levin et al., 2020; Goldring et al., 2021; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011),
principals need support in reorienting their efforts toward the development of future leaders.
Clearly defined leadership standards are the first step in redefining this important work (Grissom
et al., 2021; Hargreaves et al., 2003; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011).
Standards for Leadership: A Focus on Leadership Development
One of the barriers to effective succession planning is the additional demands it can place
on an already overworked school leader (Peters-Hawkins et al., 2018). In asking principals to
develop a coherent approach to developing future school leadership, school systems first need to
provide clarity on the skills and competencies necessary to drive school improvement through
leadership standards (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011; Syed, 2015;
Turnbull et al., 2013). These standards can then drive the work of redesigning principal job
descriptions; developing more rigorous recruitment practices; improving pre-service preparation
and on-the-job leadership opportunities; and refocusing systems that support talent identification
and development (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011; Syed, 2015; Turnbull et
al., 2013).
Turnbull et al. (2013) highlight the importance of doing this work collaboratively with
local stakeholder groups so that schools can be responsive to context. In their analysis of six
large school districts engaged in a principal pipeline initiative, they explain that all districts
35

based their standards on existing models, yet all engaged in a participatory process in adapting
the models for district use. At that time, many districts were guided by the 2008 Interstate School
Leaders Licensure Standards, which have since been adapted to the Professional Standards for
Educational Leaders to better align with the expectation that principals should provide
instructional leadership and develop leadership capacity of staff, with a focus on improving
student achievement and wellbeing (Prociw & Francis, 2016). This evolution of guiding
standards reaffirms the importance of continual review and evaluation within a school’s
succession planning process. Without such an iterative process, standards run the risk of not
being aspirational and future oriented (Anderson & Turnbull, 2016), causing growth to stagnate,
and reverting evaluation processes back to a position of disconnect with profession practice
(Searby et al., 2017; Turnbull et al., 2015).
Systems That Drive Talent Identification and Development
Leadership standards facilitate the development of tools and systems that can better
predict who will succeed in the principalship (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms,
2011), but beyond talent identification, there is work to be done in defining clear and equitable
pathways (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Goldring et al., 2021; Peters-Hawkins et al., 2018). Bierly and
Shy (2013) explain that the work of defining great leadership needs to be a collaborative
endeavor and highlight the importance of standards in mapping out a multistep journey that
intentionally develops the required skills and competencies through appropriate leadership
experiences. Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms (2011) advocate for this work to be led from the very
top, with district superintendents actively involved in a screening process that matches internal
talent with appropriate stretch assignments. In designing these leadership development
opportunities, the authors explain the importance of blending theory with on-the-job experience
36

and suggest a balance of 20% and 80% respectively. Borrowing from the Centre for Creative
Leadership, Bierly and Shy (2013) offer similar guidance in the ratio 70:20:10, intentionally
making space for feedback and coaching at 20%.
Principals are charged with leading this multi-year work at the level of the school with
Hargreaves (2005) calling for a tenure of at least 5 years in order for school communities to see
tangible improvements. Distributed leadership models can help to sustain these efforts
(Hargreaves et al., 2003; Spillane et al., 2007), with a collaborative team-based approach to
solving school problems a fertile ground for developing future principals (Schmidt-Davis &
Bottoms, 2011). However, there is a danger that tasks more akin to management are ones that are
distributed to assistant principals and teacher leaders, further constraining their ability to develop
their instructional leadership (Goldring et al., 2021; Grenda & Hackmann 2014).
One potential solution that has been explored is the use of School Administration
Managers (SAMs) in schools (Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011; Turnbull et al., 2009). In their
study of 75 principals who agreed to be paired with a SAM to help repurpose their time, Turnbull
et al. (2009) reported that principals were able to dedicate an average of 58 minutes each day to
instruction leadership. This, despite the fact that principals in the study reported spending an
average of 30 minutes less time at school each day.
Freeing time for principals to lead and develop tasks that challenge teacher leaders to
reveal their interpersonal skills, task persistence and desire for school improvement, still requires
principals to know the talent within their buildings (Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). An
increased focus on instructional leadership can certainly support this need, but too often the
absence of an effective evaluation process, with meaningful variation in the data, undermines the
leadership development process (Grissom & Loeb, 2017; Folsom et al., 2015; Peters-Hawkins et
37

al., 2018). Accurate feedback requires quality assessments aligned to leadership standards that
have been appropriately moderated to match with their position along the pathway to the
principalship (Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). It also requires that principals know the facets
of leadership at these levels that are markers for success beyond the next promotion (Rothwell,
2010; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011).
Early identification of talent is also crucial (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Hargreaves et al., 2003;
Parfitt, 2017) as it provides principals with greater scope to design the individualized support
plans and mentorship aspiring leaders need. Bierly and Shy (2013) take this a step further and
suggest that school leaders should be evaluated on their “ability to identify and strategically
place outstanding talent in key roles” (p. 42). Goldring et al. (2021) highlight the role of the
assistant principal as an increasingly common steppingstone, calling on school systems to
explicitly redesign the role in preparation for an effective principalship. Cieminski (2018)
explains that the most innovative schools are already doing precisely that.
Steppingstone Roles and the Assistant Principalship
While most assistant principals wish to advance to the principalship (Goldring et al.,
2021), there are those who view their role as a career position, preferring to step back from the
increased responsibilities and scrutiny that come with a promotion (Farley-Ripple et al., 2015;
Bierly & Shy, 2013). However, for leadership pipeline school districts that tend to view
leadership on a continuum (Normore 2007; Turnbull et al. 2013), this form of stability comes at a
cost, depriving a potential principal of a valuable developmental experience (Bierly & Shy,
2013; Goldring et al., 2021; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). Cieminski (2018) notes that when
schools are viewed as successful, the applicant pool for the principalship is large and the role of
assistant principal is not always seen as a viable steppingstone. Conversely, for those schools and
38

students that are most in need of an effective principal, those that often experience the highest
degrees of principal turnover and the subsequent negative effects on school outcomes, redefining
the role of assistant principal might be one way to deliver a more sustained approach to school
leadership.
Over the past 25 years, the number of assistant principals within the United States has
increased at a rate that is six times larger than the corresponding increase in principals (Goldring
et al., 2021). The average number of assistant principals in secondary schools serving more than
a thousand students was at 3.3 for the 2015–16 school year (Taie & Goldring, 2017). Schmidt-
Davis and Bottoms (2011) explain that most principals do not have time to practice before
assuming their role and argue that guided experience across a number of substantive roles is an
essential part of effective principal preparation. For schools serving large communities of
learners, the potential to develop multiple steppingstone roles, and rotate candidates through
them, is there just by virtue of scale. We know that effective principals orient their work towards
instructional leadership (Fuller et al., 2018; Grissom et al., 2021; Hausman et al., 2002) and the
role of the assistant principal should similarly be redesigned with this focus in mind (Goldring et
al., 2021).
Unfortunately, most schools lack guiding standards to define steppingstone roles such as
the assistant principalship (Bierly & Shy, 2013), resulting in a lack of clarity (Turnbull et al.,
2015), with many relegated to a routine of management rather than learning to lead (Schmidt-
Davis & Bottoms, 2011). The absence of standards not only limits transparency as to the types of
experience that can support principal preparation (Turnbull et al., 2015), but it can also constrain
equitable access to the experiences themselves (Goldring et al., 202). Bierly and Shy (2013)
report that 35% of the assistant principals they surveyed did not feel responsible for developing
39

future leaders, with the majority also not involved in decisions related to employment of staff.
This may seem surprising, given the movement to diffused leadership, with the assistant
principals increasingly leading teams of department chairs and teacher leaders (Goldring et al.,
2021).
There is some evidence that a focus towards instructional leadership is beginning to take
hold, with Searny et al (2017) stating that 62% of assistant principals in their research self-
reporting that more than 50% of their work responsibilities fell within the domain of instructional
leadership. It is a start, but more needs to be done to ensure that assistant principals are not just
hired to take things off the principal’s plate and are instead provided with opportunities for
growth and increased impact (Bierly & Shy, 2013). Part of this work requires the development of
specific leadership standards that align with the role’s function as preparation for the
principalship, but principals also need support so that they may be able to mentor and guide their
colleagues through the intentional delegation of sequential leadership tasks (Goldring et al.,
2021).
Managing Principal Succession
According to Hargreaves (2005), “principals stand on the shoulders of those who went
before them and lay the foundation for those who will follow” (p. 163). However, too often
schools fail to understand and manage principal succession events to their detriment (Fink &
Brayman, 2004; Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Lee, 2015). Failure to properly manage this
process, being mindful of the political, historical, and longitudinal aspects of change, can
severely undermine school improvement efforts (Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006), with years of
progress potentially erased in the process (Lee, 2015). Preserving the legacies of past principals,
understanding the capacities they have developed and how they may be built upon, requires a
40

deliberate process that facilitates the exchange of knowledge so that new leaders are positioned
for success (Hargreaves, 2005). In designing such processes, schools must first understand the
nature of the succession.
Hargreaves et al. (2003) suggest classification of succession events on two continuums:
the extent to which the event is planned versus unplanned, and the extent to which the new
leader will be expected to initiate change i.e., the level of continuity versus discontinuity. Fink
and Brayman (2004) explain that there are very few examples of planned continuity in schools,
while Hargreaves (2005) described most as “a paradoxical mix of unplanned discontinuity and
continuity” (p. 167) highlighting an inability to maintain the achievements of the predecessor as
discontinuity, and consequential regression to the mediocrity that existed before them as a form
of continuity. Recognizing the entry point for the new principal is critical if the process is to be
supported through the successful employment of outbound and inbound leadership knowledge
(Hargreaves et al. 2003; Lee 2015).
Drawing on Wenger’s (1998) work on communities of practice, Fink and Brayman
(2004) discuss four trajectories relevant to the stages of principal succession: inbound
trajectories refer to participants intent on eventually becoming full participants; peripheral
trajectories do not lead to full participation (which may not always inhibit a principal’s
effectiveness); insider trajectories reference full participation and grow and develop over time;
while outbound trajectories apply to those who expect to depart the community at some point.
Related to these stages of succession are the associated knowledge classifications. Hargreaves
and Goodson (2006) define inbound knowledge as “the knowledge of leadership of a particular
school that is needed to change it” (p. 19) while outbound knowledge is defined as “the
knowledge needed to preserve past successes” (p. 19). They also define insider knowledge as
41

“the knowledge one gains from and exercises with other members of the community after
becoming known, trusted, and accepted” (p. 19). Hargreaves (2005) explains that schools are too
often preoccupied with inbound knowledge, while Fink and Brayman (2004) suggest that a
movement to full participation and the insider trajectory can facilitate greater leadership
distribution which fosters an improved exchange of outbound knowledge. Unfortunately, the
typically short tenure of a principal often constrains this evolution (Hargreaves et al. 2003; Fink
& Brayman, 2004; Fullan, 2002). However, in situations of planned discontinuity, there are some
advantages to restricting the flow of outbound knowledge and with this in mind, school districts
may better support their change efforts through the reconstruction of entire school leadership
teams (Lee, 2015; Peters-Hawkins et al., 2018).
The revolving door of poorly managed principal successions can breed cynicism in
teacher culture, complicating the arrival conditions that new principals must navigate
(Hargreaves et al. 2003; Hargreaves, 2005; Lee, 2015). In a study of 16 elementary school
principals at various locations on the planned and continuity continuums, Lee (2015) found that
the more discontinuous the succession, the greater the teacher resistance, requiring higher levels
of expertise to balance the tension between building community trust and overcoming the
resistance to change through accountability measures. For those principals in an unplanned
succession, the study also found that a significant part of their first year was spent trying to
understand the socio-political landscape of the school as they learnt to survive. The study
concludes that while unplanned successions should be avoided, principals in these situations
need to establish reliable information gathering systems to mitigate against the lack of outbound
knowledge exchanged in transition.
42

Consideration of outbound knowledge can happen through leadership distribution models
and the grooming of successors (Hargreaves, 2005; Fullan, 2002). This can also offer advantages
in terms of how quickly the new leader can adjust and effectively operate within the existing
school culture (Buckman et al., 2018; Goldring et al., 2021; Schmidt-Davis Bottoms, 2011).
However, Buckman et al. (2018) explain those promoted internally will still require socialization
and a period of acclimatization, especially when prior roles have not intentionally built future
leadership capacity. Within the private sector Collins (2016) highlights that only 5% of the
leaders from his “great companies” were external hires, as compared with 30% from the
comparison group, noting that these internally promoted leaders also had longer tenures.
Hiring internally provides ample time to manage the succession process and develop a
clear and transparent transition plan that is inclusive of incoming and outgoing leadership, as
well as key stakeholder groups (Peters-Hawkins et al., 2018). One of the dangers of the internal
hire can be a missed opportunity to introduce new perspectives (Buckman et al., 2018). Bowler
(2007) suggests that successful organizations can allay these concerns by growing inside-outside
leaders which they define as leaders from within the organization that are capable of introducing
new perspectives. How schools systematically connect their leaders with opportunities to
develop and introduce new lines of thinking can be addressed through the thoughtful design of
induction and ongoing support processes.
Principal Induction and Socialization
Socialization is the process through which an individual learns or acquires the necessary
knowledge, skills, and values needed to effectively perform a social role in an organization
(Merton & Merton, 1968; Van Maanen & Schein, 1979). It is a major part of the leadership
succession process in which attention is drawn to both the leader and the context (Normore,
43

2004). The potentially detrimental effects of principal succession, and the accelerating rates of
principal turnover, provide an impetus for school systems to uncover more about the role of the
organization in principal socialization (Barnett & Shoho, 2017; Bengston et al., 2013). From the
moment their tenure begins, principals are confronted with the responsibilities and challenges of
veterans (Bengston et al., 2013; Crow; 2006), with this lack of a mediated entry causing stress
and potential burnout (Crow, 2006). Parkay et al. (1992) explain that poorly managed
socialization can lead to principals abandoning their belief in their capacity to initiate change,
while Bengston et al. (2013) also highlight the harmful effects on self-efficacy and retention.
How new principals are socialized into organizations impacts the organization's ability to attract
and retain high potential candidates (Barnett & Shoho, 2017). This, coupled with the growing
complexity within the role suggest that the issue of principal socialization should no longer be
left to chance (Bengston et al., 2013).
Professional socialization refers to the process of acquiring the knowledge, skills and
dispositions necessary to enact a professional role regardless of setting (Crow, 2006; Normore,
2004; Parkay et al., 1992). Organizational socialization is the process by which one is taught how
things are done here and learns the ropes of a particular organizational role (Crow, 2006; Van
Maanen & Schein, 1979). It is a process that is largely contextual, is contingent on organizational
culture, and is focused on transitioning from the outsider to insider trajectory (Bengston et al.,
2013). Crow (2006) calls for this process in schools to broaden its boundaries to include health
agencies, community groups, and religious and government entities, in order to strengthen the
learning for new principals. Personal socialization is less prevalent in literature but involves the
change in self-identity as people learn and establish themselves in new roles (Crow, 2006).
Normore (2004) refers to this as resocialization which occurs as new leaders renegotiate their
44

personal identities as a result of climbing the professional ladder. This author also highlights the
advantages of past experience and knowledge that an internally promoted candidate can bring to
the organizational socialization process. Bengston et al (2013) consider induction processes to be
systemic and planned approaches used to control the process of organizational socialization,
explaining that a successful implementation of an induction process often involves mentoring,
and is dependent upon knowledge of organizational socialization theory.
Organizational socialization theory is founded on the assumptions that organizations can
and do influence the socialization of new employees, and that these employees respond to such
tactics in one of three ways: custodianship whereby the status quo of the current role and mission
is maintained; content innovation which involves a change in how knowledge and strategies are
applied to maintain the mission of the role; and role innovation which leads to a redefining of the
purpose of the role (Van Maanen & Schein, 1979). Socialization tactics that the organization
deploys fall within six dimensions: collective versus individual; formal versus informal;
sequential versus random; fixed versus variable; serial versus disjunctive; and investiture versus
divestiture. (Van Maanen & Schein, 1979). Bengston et al (2013) utilized this theory as a
conceptual framework for their study of 29 leader socializations across four school districts in
the United States. These authors found that most schools saw a custodial reaction to socialization
tactics, with the most commonly used being collective, formal, informal, serial and investiture
tactics. Those schools using investiture tactics, whereby the leader is fully accepted for who they
are, led to a role or content innovation response (Bengston et al., 2013). Understanding the
nature and intent of the succession event will naturally influence the socialization tactics used.
Hart (1993) offers three stages that emerge from the socialization stage theory literature:
learning and uncertainty, gradual adjustment, and stabilization. Bengston et al., (2013) suggest
45

the first two stages provide the most fertile ground for socialization tactics to take hold. Barnett
and Shoho (2017) offer similar assertions while Normore (2004) modifies the final stage to
include the reflective component of incorporation, whereby the individual reflects on the growth
and change between present and former self. Parkay et al., (1992) propose a five-stage model for
principal socialization and identify the stages of survival, control, stability, educational
leadership, and professional actualization. Their research examining the socialization of 12 high
school principals across a 3-year period was founded on the assumptions that principals begin a
new principalship at different stages of socialization and that no single factor determines a
principal’s stage of development with principals able to operate at more than one stage
simultaneously. These authors found that principals recalibrated their expectations for promoting
change as they moved through the stages and suggest that a principal’s eventual level of
professional socialization is strongly indicated by the end of the first year. These findings
emphasize the need for schools’ systems to be more purposeful in how they support their new
leaders to move towards the professional actualization stage through an intentional and
personalized induction process (Crow, 2006), where the leader engenders a culture of
empowerment, growth and authenticity that helps to bring out the best in others (Parkay et al.,
1992).
Normore (2004) explains that no induction process can adequately repair a flawed
recruitment process and advocates for schools to fully articulate the demands and expectations
for the role, together with the skills and competencies sought, before engaging in any leadership
succession process. Barnett and Shoho (2017) highlight the disconnect between new principal
expectations and lived reality as a key challenge to the socialization process and explain that
principals who have served as assistant principals are not only better problem solvers but are less
46

emotionally exhausted by the demands of the job. Similarly, Crow (2006) suggests that
redefining the role of the assistant principal as principal preparation can positively impact the
socialization stage at which candidates arrive at the principalship, particularly those that are
promoted from within the same school. McClellan and Casey (2015) also view the assistant
principalship as a solution to schools attracting and retaining high quality leaders, calling for a
sequential, co-constructed socialization process in which the developmental needs of the
principal are targeted. Creating an induction process that recognizes that learning is not random,
acknowledges the fragile nature of socialization, and provides space for the divesting of old
professional identities in preparation for new ones, is therefore essential in positioning new
principals for success (Bengston et al., 2013; Crow, 2006; Hart, 1993). Supporting this process
with a variety of opportunities for feedback and reflection in pursuit of increased levels of self-
awareness is just as critical, and high-quality mentorship can play a significant role in facilitating
this work (Bengston et al., 2013; McClellan & Casey, 2015).
Principal Mentorship
Mentoring can play an important role in preparing, developing and socializing school
leaders (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Daresh, 2004; Liang & Augustine-Shaw, 2016; Schmidt-Davis &
Bottoms, 2011). Studies consistently show that aspiring principals view both informal and formal
mentoring as valuable to their future development, with the best mentors being successful current
and former principals (Aravena, 2020; Cieminski, 2018; Goldring et al., 2021; Schmidt-Davis &
Bottoms, 2011). Without appropriate support, principals are often left to make sense of their
roles by themselves or through informal feedback from teachers and other stakeholders (Crow,
2006). The absence of targeted feedback that is both supportive and candid can result in issues of
poor job satisfaction and retention (Barnett & Shoho, 2017; McClellan & Casey, 2015). Schmidt-
47

Davis and Bottoms (2011) explain that mentorship must be reconceived as truly indispensable
from leadership development, while Daresh (2004) argues that a commitment to mentoring
current and aspiring leaders signals a culture of developmental support that and can help to
reframe the early stages of the principalship beyond just mere survival.
Parylo et al. (2012) examined principal mentoring and identified the five major themes as
principal mentorship for recruitment, socialization, support, professional development, and
reciprocal learning. These authors highlight mentoring as important for emerging and sitting
principals, explaining that for aspiring principals it encourages them to consider the
principalship, for new principals it is a powerful socializing strategy, while for all career stage
principals it is an excellent source of professional development. Bloom et al. (2003) choose to
make a distinction between mentors and coaches, defining mentors as organizational insiders in
job-alike positions, whereas the most effective coaches they consider to be outsiders who have
professional coaching as their primary work. They explain that coaching is a goal-oriented
process in which the coach is a fully present listener who seamlessly moves between
instructional and facilitative strategies, probing to stimulate metacognition and reflection. They
also suggest that novice principals can benefit from both types of support. Regardless of the
label, there is agreement that mentors and coaches need to receive training, be carefully selected,
be resourced with the time necessary to conduct the work and have clear insight regarding the
potential benefits that these practices can offer (Bloom et al., 2003; Daresh, 2004).
Within steppingstone roles, mentoring can help bridge the gap between the narrow focus
of the current role and the leadership skills required at the next level (Barnett & Shoho, 2017;
Liang & Augustine-Shaw, 2016; Goldring et al., 2021). From an organizational socialization
perspective, mentoring is seen as a powerful support that can help to mitigate against feeling of
48

professional isolation, issues in managing workload and priorities, while also helping to maintain
a focus on instructional leadership (Barnett & Shoho, 2017; Lee, 2015; Parylo et al., 2012). In
addition to developing personal and professional capacity, mentoring can also facilitate the deep
reflection that can reshape the values and dispositions that determine how the role of the
principal will be enacted (Barnett & Shoho, 2017; Crow, 2006; Daresh, 2004). When structured
sequentially, mentoring can help to improve professional capacity by facilitating a regular
transition of theory into practice, and consequently enhance self-efficacy (Daresh, 2004; Parylo
et al., 2012). From a school systems perspective, it can help to support the leadership
development pipeline and foster a climate of collegial support (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Daresh,
2004; Parylo et al., 2012).
Parylo et al. (2012) noted in their research that school systems deploying formal
mentoring resulted in higher degrees of satisfaction, but as Bengtson et al. (2013) point out, not
every context is blessed with the scale to make that viable. Villani (2006) highlights the
importance of the mentoring model being responsive to the needs of the school system.
However, failure to acknowledge the constraints inherent in a system (resources such as time and
trained mentors) can result in difficulties in sustaining focus, leading to a breakdown in process
(Daresh, 2004). This is particularly troubling given previous socialization experiences can have
an impact on subsequent socialization processes, with negative experiences of mentoring
constraining the likelihood of participating in similar opportunities in the future (Crow, 2006;
Parylo et al., 2012). Consistent throughout the literature is the importance of mentorship as a
reciprocal learning; that both mentor and mentee have opportunities to develop and learn within
the process (Daresh, 2004; Liang & Augustine-Shaw, 2016 Parylo et al., 2012). Where possible,
careful consideration should be given to matching the mentor and mentee (Daresh, 2004; Parylo
49

et al., 2012), with McClellan and Casey (2015) advocating for a match in which the mentor is
viewed as someone who “could represent a provisional self” (p. 751).
Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms (2011) advocate strongly for all new principals to have a
minimum of 2 years of formal mentoring, suggesting that this support be extended to aspiring
leaders too. Bierly and Shy (2013) also highlight the potential for high-quality mentors to widen
the applicant pool for future leadership vacancies through mentorship that builds self-efficacy
and highlights the gratifying nature of the work. Similarly, Parylo et al. (2012) outline the value
of mentorship in terms of principal sustainability and job satisfaction and advocate for a shift in
principal job description language that encourages experienced principals to mentor others.
Recognizing that there is still more research to be done regarding the benefits and dangers of
having an evaluating supervisor as a mentor (Parfitt, 2017; Parylo et al., 2012), principals
accepting the role of formal mentorship for other aspiring leaders is a step that helps to sustain
and reiterate the leadership succession cycle (Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011).
Summary of Literature Review
The school leadership literature is clear that principals can have a profound effect on the
communities they serve, influencing a range of school factors that result in better outcomes for
students (Branch et al., 2013; Hallinger & Heck, 1996; Leithwood et al., 2004; Waters et al.,
2003). With specific reference to student achievement, the research is clear that not only do
principals matter, but their significance may have been underestimated by researchers such as
Leithwood et al. (2004) at the turn of the century (Grissom et al., 2021). Principal effects on
student outcomes are mediated through a range of factors that include impacts on classroom
instruction, school climate, hiring and retention of teachers, and resource management, but
studies to date have rarely been able to provide clear empirical evidence as to the nature of
50

effective principal performance (Grissom et al., 2021). However, themes that emerge from the
literature include the ability to build a compelling vision and establish a defensible set of
directions; understanding and developing people; reorienting work towards instructionally
focused interactions with teachers; building a productive school climate; and redesigning the
organization with an emphasis on building future leadership capacity (Bierly & Shy, 2013;
Grissom et al., 2021; Leithwood et al., 2008).
The rate of principal turnover continues to accelerate, leading to shorter principal tenures,
losses in leadership capacity, experience, and institutional memory, in addition to negatively
impacting a range of other factors such as teacher attrition, school climate and student
achievement (Bartanen et al, 2019; Béteille et al, 2012; Grissom et al., 2021). There is consensus
that effective principals matter but it is also clear that these principals need time to operationalize
their effectiveness and make their mark. Consequently, it is important for school systems to
understand what factors contribute to the issue of principal turnover within their context, with the
five key areas offered by Levin et al. (2020) a useful starting point.
Although the research base on effective school leadership within the international school
context is limited, the importance of embracing paradox, coping with ambiguity, high levels of
communicative competency, and transparency and inclusivity in decision making processes
emerge as themes (Hill, 2018; Gardner-McTaggart, 2018; Keller, 2015; Morrison, 2018).
International school leaders wishing to successfully implement change must have high levels of
cultural competence, community trust, and an appreciation of the community values and belief
that shape how their change initiatives will be received (Hill, 2011; Morrison, 2018). Leading
this work also requires international school leaders to continually confront the multifaceted
nature of perspectives within their contexts and support their communities to do the same
51

(Keller, 2015). Managing this process impartially and with transparency, engendering the
sentiment that intelligent decisions are being made along the way, is critical if community
members are to be comfortable supporting the eventual outcomes (Hill, 2011; Morrison, 2018).
However, putting this theory into practice is not always easy, with Odlan and Ruzicka, (2009)
citing differences with school leadership as the main driver for teacher turnover. The transient
nature of international school communities is also highlighted as a factor that makes it especially
challenging to sustain international school change efforts, which can subsequently lead to further
leadership attrition (Morrison, 2018).
The inevitability of leadership succession, and the disruption it has the potential to be
paired with, calls for an examination of the systems that develop and sustain leadership, with the
most innovative schools actively engaged in the process of succession planning and management
(Bierly & Shy, 2013; Cieminski, 2018; Hargreaves et al., 2003). How schools respond to their
present and future leadership needs is a dynamic, non-linear and cyclical process that must be
responsive to context. Themes that emerged from the literature include clearly defined standards
for leadership; systems for talent identification and development; leadership development
through purposefully designed roles and placements; onboarding, support, and mentorship;
evaluation and process improvement; and actively developing leadership in others. Outlining a
clear pathway to the principalship, one in which developmental experiences are mapped out and
paired with appropriate guided support and mentorship, can help to expand the pool of high-
quality principal applicants, with researchers suggesting that the role of the assistant principal
should be reconceived in terms of principal preparation (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Goldring et al.,
2021; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). It is for this reason that both principals and assistant
principals have been chosen as participants in this study.
52

For schools to support their new principals to quickly be effective, schools must
understand both the nature of the succession event and its intent in terms of the school’s present
and future leadership needs. The extent to which the succession event is intended to be a
departure from past practice will dictate how a transition plan is crafted and enacted, influencing
how both outbound and inbound leadership knowledge is exchanged and used (Fink & Brayman,
2004; Hargreaves et al., 2003). Careful assessment of the proposed entry point of the new
principal will also support the process of principal socialization so that appropriate socialization
tactics can be used in alignment with both the succession objectives and time frame (Bengston et
al., 2013; Van Maanen & Schein, 1979).
Finally, mentoring is consistently highlighted throughout the literature as being an
essential element in preparing, developing, and socializing school leaders (Daresh, 2004; Liang
& Augustine-Shaw, 2016). For aspiring principals, it encourages them to consider the
principalship; for new principals, it is a powerful socializing strategy; while for all career stage
principals, it is an excellent source of professional development (Parylo et al., 2012). The role
that mentoring can play in supporting the socialization of new and aspiring principals is
particularly important as according to research from Parkay et al. (1992) a principal’s eventual
level of professional socialization within a school is strongly indicated by the end of their first
year. The next chapter will provide an overview of the methodology used to study how AIS
plans for, manages, and supports principal and assistant principal successions.
53

Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this study was to explore how AIS plans for, manages, and supports
principal and assistant principal successions and to understand how recently appointed principals
and assistant principals experienced their transition into their new roles. The study was guided by
the following research questions:
1. How does AIS plan for leadership succession at the principal and assistant principal
level?
2. How does AIS support the socialization of newly appointed principals and assistant
principals?
3. How do newly appointed principals and assistant principals at AIS experience the
transition into their new roles?
To answer these questions, semi-structured interview protocols were developed for senior
school leaders involved with the process of planning, managing, and supporting principal and
assistant principal succession. A semi-structured protocol was also developed for recently
appointed principals and assistant principals. Both interview protocols were developed using the
conceptual framework outlined in Chapter 1, which was informed by the literature in the areas of
effective school leadership at the level of the principal, leading within the international school
context, succession planning in education, and managing the process of principal succession, all
of which play a role in influencing how schools onboard and support new principals through
principal induction and socialization. This chapter provides a rationale for the research design
and outlines the methodology for sampling, data collection, and data analysis.
54

Procedure
Qualitative researchers are driven by a desire to explore, document, and interpret how
people experience and make meaning in their worlds (Patton, 2014). While quantitative research
paradigms tend to be rooted in the belief that knowledge is pre-existing and waiting to be
discovered, qualitative research is founded upon the belief that knowledge is socially constructed
and continues to change and evolve as participants engage and make meaning in an experience,
activity, or phenomenon (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Within qualitative research, the researcher
acts as the primary instrument for data collection and analysis and utilizes a study design that is
flexible and emergent, with the data collection and data analysis process often in dialogue
(Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Merriam & Tisdell (2013) explain that qualitative
research is usually classified as either basic, or applied, with the former motivated by intellectual
interest with the goal of extending the knowledge base, and the latter focused on improving the
quality of practice of a particular discipline. This study used a basic qualitative study design,
which aligns with an exploratory research purpose that also aims to document and capture
experiences (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Data for this study was collected using semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured
interviews were chosen to allow the researcher the flexibility to respond to the developing
orientation of the respondents, in addition to any unexpected ideas and understandings that
emerged (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This structure provided a
framework that ensured useful data was gathered and the respondents time was respected. The
use of interviews allowed the researcher to gain deep insights into the feelings, thoughts, and
intentions of the respondent; to understand their perspectives and other unobservable elements
such as behaviors and events that are bounded by other points in time (Patton, 2014).
55

Participants
Given that the purpose of this study was to first explore how AIS plans for, manages, and
supports principal and assistant principal successions, it was essential to target those involved in
leading the work of succession planning and management at AIS. According to Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) purposeful sampling is rooted in the assumption that a researcher wishes to
“discover, learn, and gain insight” (p. 96) and so a sample is selected that will optimize learning
aligned to the goals of the research. As a result, purposeful sampling was used to target members
of the school’s senior leadership team who are responsible for assessing and responding to the
school’s present and future leadership needs at the level of the principal and assistant principal.
This study also targeted senior school leaders directly responsible for supporting the transitions
of the newly appointed principal and assistant principal participants of this study. In total, there
were six senior school leaders that satisfy this criterion. The researcher had anticipated that the
interviews with these participants would help in addressing first two research question, which is
reflected in the construction of the senior leadership team interview protocol.
Purposeful sampling was also be used to address the second major objective of the study
which is to understand how recently appointed principals and assistant principals experience
their transition into their new roles. These participants were defined as recently appointed
principals and assistant principals if they had officially commenced their new roles within the
current or previous school year. The rationale for selecting a 2-year time frame was driven by the
researcher’s desire to accurately capture the current reality at AIS, even though this restricted the
pool of available participants.
There were five assistant principals and principals at AIS who satisfied this criterion, all
of whom agreed to participate in this study. Maxwell (2013) highlights five possible goals of
56

purposeful sampling: achieving representativeness; capturing the heterogeneity in the population;
selection of participants critical for testing initial and emerging theories; establishing
opportunities for comparison; and working with participants with whom you can establish the
most productive relationships. These five participants spanned two divisions, one of which had
experienced significant leadership turnover over the last 9 years, while the other was
experiencing its first new team member in 6 years. This provides an opportunity for a
comparison of the transition experience for assistant principals joining an established and stable
team, versus a team that has experienced greater turnover. Within these five participants, three
had been hired internally, with the remaining two joining the school from abroad. Three were
transitioning into their new roles during current school year, with the other two having
experienced their transition last school year and now actively involved in supporting the
transition of others who were currently joining their teams. Two of the participants were male,
and three of the five were experiencing the role of assistant principal or principal for the first
time. Although small, this sample provided several opportunities for comparison, a reasonable
level of heterogeneity, in addition to being representative of principals and assistant principals
currently serving at AIS. The researcher anticipated that the interviews with these participants
would help in addressing second and third research questions, which is reflected in the
construction of the assistant principal and principal interview protocol.
Instrumentation
A semi-structured, open-ended interview protocol was developed for both the senior
school leaders involved in the process of planning, managing, and supporting principal and
assistant principal succession as well as the participants who were recently appointed principals
and assistant principals. The questions in both protocols were informed by Patton’s (2014) work
57

in drafting truly open ended and carefully worded questions, in which the author specifies six
categories of questions that focus on experience and behavior, opinions and values, feelings,
knowledge, sensory descriptions, and background demographics. Straus et al.’s (1981)
hypothetical, devil’s advocate, ideal position, and interpretive questions were also considered in
the design. Finally, the conceptual framework outlined in Chapter 1, and informed by the
literature in the areas of effective school leadership at the level of the principal, leading within
the international school context, succession planning in education, and managing the process of
principal succession, all of which play a role in influencing how schools onboard and support
new principals through principal induction and socialization, was also used to guide question
development. Additional probing and elaborations questions were developed to help surface the
desired depth of response (Patton, 2014).
The semi-structured approach allowed the researcher the opportunity to respond to the
ideas and experiences that emerged as the interview progressed, while still ensuring that
meaningful data that aligns with the goals of the study was collected efficiently within the time
constraints of the interview (Lockmiller & Lester, 2017; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The structure
also helped in reducing significant variations across interviews, which subsequently supported
the data analysis and comparison stage. One drawback of the inherent structure is its potential to
limit the researcher’s ability to explore ideas that were not considered when the protocols were
developed (Patton, 2014). The complete interview protocols may be found in Appendix A
(senior school leader) and Appendix B (principals and assistant principals).

58

Data Collection
Qualitative data is sourced through interviews, observations, and document analysis
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2014). While the data in this study was collected through
semi-structured interviews, the researcher did have the opportunity to informally observe some
of the participants in their roles. The researcher was also able to engage with some documents
and communications that were crafted by some of the study participants. However, the focus of
this discussion will center on the decisions surrounding the data collected using qualitative
interviews.
The first consideration was the timing within the school year that the interviews would be
conducted. For participants that are commencing their new role during the 2021–22 school year,
the researcher felt it was important that they had time to experience and reflect upon their initial
transition before engaging in an interview. Several authors discuss the challenges of the initial
stages of the principal as being a period of learning, uncertainty, and survival (Bengston et al.,
2013; Hart, 1993; Parkay et al., 1992). There is also the challenge of leading the start of a school
year within the unprecedented pandemic context. For these reasons, the researcher elected to
begin the interview process for all participants during the second quarter of the 2021–22 school
year. Participants were invited to choose a time and location of the interview and were given the
option to conduct the interview in person or via video conference. All participants elected to
conduct an in-person interview. Weiss (1995) suggested a minimum interview time of 30
minutes but also explains that it is not uncommon for interviewees to still be engaged at the 2-
hour mark. The researcher anticipated that both protocols could be comprehensively worked
within a 75-minute timeframe and that this would still provide enough space for respondents to
surface unanticipated topics.
59

Participants were asked if the interview may be recorded using VoiceRecord software on
an iPhone. They were also reminded that they do not have to answer anything that do not feel
comfortable with, and that they may stop the recording at any time. In addition to recording the
interview, the researcher took notes using a template that was informed by the study’s research
questions and the conceptual framework outlined in Chapter 1. Immediately after each interview,
the researcher upload audio files to Otter.ai for transcription. The researcher then manually
checked the transcriptions to ensure accuracy. Each interview transcript was also shared with the
respective participants to ensure that the responses that were captured were an accurate reflection
of the perspectives they intended to share.
Data Analysis
Maxwell (2013) characterizes three phases of data analysis as memos, categorizing
strategies, and connecting strategies. Categorizing strategies often begin with coding which
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) describe as “nothing more than assigning some sort of shorthand
designation to various aspects of your data so that you may easily retrieve specific pieces of the
data” (p. 199), with the aim of supporting the researcher in making meaning through analysis.
Lochmiller and Lester (2017) also explain that codes are simply “text-based labels” (p. 174) that
provide meaning to data and categorize codes as descriptive codes that provide a brief
description of the data; in-vivo codes which are terms used directly by participants; and priori
codes which are informed by the related research literature and are developed prior to the
analysis.
As described in the previous section, the researcher first generated transcripts
electronically, then manually check for accuracy, before resharing with participants for a further
check. The researcher then drafted a memo using both the interview notes and the transcript.
60

These memos contributed to an electronic audit trail, which was essentially a record of the
researcher’s interactions with the data, and the analytical decision-making processes that guided
the study (Lochmiller & Lester, 2017; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Coding was then the primary
mechanism for data analysis. The researcher began using a priori code that was developed using
the literature outlined in Chapter 2, together with the conceptual framework discussed in Chapter
1. During the first phase, the priori codes guided a deductive approach to transcript analysis,
purposefully examining the data with the research questions and conceptual framework in mind.
Open coding was then used to capture any new insights and understandings that emerged from
the data (Maxwell, 2013). The process of open coding is an inductive approach to identifying
and categorizing any data that might be able to answer the research questions (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). These open codes were not pre-determined prior to the analysis phase
and were driven by the data themselves.
The researcher then shifted into the categorization phase of analysis, sometimes referred
to as axial coding, whereby open codes were grouped into categories that cluster together in
ways that make sense to the researcher (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This process of first priori
coding, then open coding, then streamlining and categorizing using axial coding was repeated
after each interview had been conducted. A constant comparative method which involves
constantly comparing elements of the data set for similarities and differences (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016), was used throughout to further refine the data into more comprehensive
categories. Finally, informed by the tenets of grounded theory, the researcher moved to selective
coding, which involves identifying core categories around which a substantive theory that is
grounded in the data, may be developed (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
61

Credibility and Trustworthiness
Credibility refers to the internal validity of the research design; that the research explores
what it intended to study, and that the findings are congruent with perceived reality (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). At the start of this chapter, it was noted that qualitative research is rooted in
constructivist ideals, and the belief that knowledge and reality are socially constructed, with
participant perceptions changing and evolving as they continue to make meaning within the
worlds in which they operate (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016; Patton, 2014). Internal validity in
qualitative research therefore hinges on interpretations of reality, and it is this lens through which
the data is collected, interpreted, and translated. Maxwell (2013) explains that we can never
really capture reality, and that validity is relative and not something that may be “proved or taken
for granted” (p. 121). As such, the traditional construct of validity has been abandoned by some
qualitative researchers, and notions of trustworthiness, authenticity, and quality are captured
within the term credibility: how credible and believable the presented findings are (Maxwell,
2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
This study deployed a range of strategies to promote credibility and trustworthiness that
include triangulation, respondent validation, adequate engagement in data collection and
analysis, presentation of rich data through thick descriptions, actively searching for negative
cases, and the use of an audit trail (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Careful attention
was also be given to the validity threats of researchers bias and reactivity. For interviews in
particular, reactivity (sometimes referred to as reflexivity) is a significant threat according to
Maxwell (2013), who explains that what is said is “always influenced by the interviewer and the
interview situation” (p. 125). One way to combat this is to develop a protocol with carefully
constructed and truly open-ended questions (Patton, 2014) as was discussed earlier in this
62

chapter. Patton (2014) also highlights the importance of maintaining empathetic neutrality while
conducting the interview, explaining neutrality in terms of nonjudgement, with empathy calling
on the researcher to exhibit interest, care and understanding. Adopting this stance can help to
create a space in which participant is more forthcoming in speaking to their truth.
The researcher’s bias is another significant threat to validity, which Maxwell (2013)
describes as “what you bring to the research from you background and identity” (p. 44). While it
is impossible to eliminate the influences of researcher bias, Locke et al. (2010) explain that such
subjectivity may be tamed if the researcher demonstrates and awareness of the factors that
contribute to their bias; is mindful of this bias as they form questions, and engage in data
collection, analysis and interpretation; makes every effort to step back and allow the data to be
what they are; and is diligent and open about keeping and sharing a record of the subjective
encounters within the study. The following provides a brief outline of the factors that contributed
to the researcher’s bias.
Researcher Bias
The researcher conducting this study is a White, middle class, middle aged, heterosexual,
cis-gendered male who is married with two children. Like Klein (2019), he represents “nearly
every dominant and dominating category in US [United States] culture” (p. 93). He lives in a
host country that some might argue has a greater penchant for patriarchy than most, which
further amplifies the privileges that certain elements of his identity allow him to profit from. The
researcher has spent the past 8 years as an educator at AIS and has recently begun a new role
leading the school’s college level learning program. He works in a division that is now
experiencing its first female principal, and that is just finished its first year with a person of color
63

on the administration team. Those making decisions at AIS have often looked like some iteration
of the researcher.
The researcher’s experience transitioning to his new leadership role has not been without
its own imperfections. Documentation of policy has been limited, systems for accountability
flawed, and in the midst of a pandemic, mentorship has been understandably intermittent.
However, he recognizes that it is possible that the lack of an onboarding or induction process
was by design in this instance. His desire to explore the study’s research questions stems from a
belief that AIS does an exceptional job of attracting and recruiting talented school leaders, yet it
may have some room for growth in supporting these leaders for success within the AIS context.
Part of the rational for using a semi-structured, open-ended interview protocols relates to the
researcher’s efforts to minimize the impact of this bias, by ensuring that the same key questions
were asked, and that participants had the freedom to respond in ways that mattered to them
(Patton, 2014).
Ethics
Many of the participants of the study are colleagues with whom the researcher works
closely. Others may have worked closely with the researcher’s wife or perhaps lead the division
in which she works. Some were relatively new to AIS and the desire to connect and build
community, and the discomfort in saying “no” too early, might have outweighed the lack of a
genuine desire to participate. Then there is the reality that some participants had completed or
were in the process of completing this doctoral program and were actively involved in the
recruitment and onboarding of several of the participants in this study. As current and former
doctoral students, they were also well versed in the research process, aware of sensible sample
sizes for a study such as this, appreciated that almost every recently appointed leader from the
64

past few years would have been asked, and would have recognized that much of the research will
speak to the effectiveness of processes they are actively involved in designing and implementing.
Consequently, there was the potential for a significant gap between a participant’s desire to
participate and their sense of safety in declining.
Every effort has been made to maintain the confidentiality of participants through the use
of pseudonyms and the presentation of data in Chapter 4. However, the fact that participants
were newly appointed leaders within a 2-year window, could mean that with a little investigation
and inferencing, participant confidentiality might still be compromised. There may also be
findings that perhaps, in the minds of our community, resonate more readily with some identities
than others. Sharing these findings becomes a problem when it compromises the confidentiality
of participants yet failing to share their truth is problematic too. In analyzing and discussing the
data it was therefore critical to constantly be considering the potential harm that may be done in
making findings public (Glesne, 2011). There are numerous ways in which this could have
happen. Briefly, if new school leaders were highly critical of the school’s onboarding process,
there was the potential for harm to come to the other participants in the study who provided their
perspectives on the onboarding and support processes they designed and implemented. Similarly,
those providing supports were often direct supervisors, so there was the potential to generate
harm by disrupting that relationship, which in turn could be damaging to the wider community if
the dynamics are such that the participants’ capacity to lead competently is subsequently
compromised, and further leadership transitions are experienced.

65

Summary
This chapter outlined how a basic qualitative research study design was used to address
the study’s research purpose and questions. Participants from the senior leadership team at AIS
were purposefully sampled, together with recently appointed principals and assistant principals,
in order to explore how AIS plans for, manages, and supports principal and assistant principal
successions, and to understand how recently appointed principals and assistant principals
experienced their transition into their new roles. Qualitative interviews were conducted using
semi-structured, open-ended interview protocols. The data from these interviews was then
analyzed using deductive and inductive coding techniques. The next chapter will share details of
the findings that emerged from the analysis.

66

Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this study is to explore how AIS plans for, manages, and supports
principal and assistant principal successions and to understand how recently appointed principals
and assistant principals experience their transition into their new roles. The study was informed
by interviewing senior school leaders involved with the process of planning, managing, and
supporting principal and assistant principal succession, as well as principals and assistant
principals who had formally commenced their current role between July 2020 and August 2021.
After an analysis of the data gathered through these semi-structured interviews the following
themes emerged:
1. A culture of growth and feedback. This included an institutional commitment to
coaching and feedback, and practices that support a learning organization.
2. The dimensions of effective school leadership at AIS. These included a school leader’s
capacity as an instructional leader, their ability to relate to people and support their
growth, and their communicative competency in establishing and selling the vision.
3. Building and nurturing strong leadership teams. This includes aspects such as strategic
portfolio design, the importance of calibration in establishing institutional coherence
and collaborative leadership approaches.
4. Developing future school leaders. This theme summarizes the school’s approach to
succession planning and leadership capacity building which includes its approach to
talent identification and development, steppingstone roles and the pathway to the
principalship, and the role of the principal in mentoring future school leaders.
67

5. Managing leadership succession at AIS. This encapsulated the process of managing
leadership successions at AIS which includes factors that influence the decision to run
a search process together with the typical leadership search process.
6. New leader socialization supports. The process of designing and implementing a
transition plan, ongoing organizational supports, and self-initiated supports are
categorized in this theme.
7. New leader perceptions of their transition. This included the new leader perceptions on
the contrast between their expectations of the role and the lived reality, workload
considerations and priorities, factors related to navigating the internal promotion, and
additional challenges in transition.
The previous three chapters have outlined the organizational context, introduced the
purpose of the study, and provided a comprehensive literature review that examined research into
why principals matter, the nuances of leading in an international school context, succession
planning in education, and the process of managing principal succession. A detailed description
of the methodology used to collect and analyze data has also been presented. This chapter will
describe the key findings that were surfaced through the analysis of the semi-structured
interviews of the 11 participants, which include five recently appointed principals and assistant
principals.
Participants
Purposeful sampling was used to identify a total of 11 participants. This included six
senior school leaders currently serving on the school’s senior leadership team who are
responsible for assessing the school’s present and future divisional leadership needs, and are
involved with the process of planning, managing, and supporting principal and assistant principal
68

succession. The remaining five participants were recently appointed principals or assistant
principals who had formally commenced their role between July 2020, and August 2021. An
individual email was sent to each participant inviting them to participate in a 75-minute semi-
structured interview.
Each of the 11 individuals that were identified and approached agreed to participate in the
study. All interviews were conducted in-person on the AIS campus beginning November 12,
2021, through to December 16, 2021. In accordance with the prevailing safety measures due to
the current pandemic, all participants were required to wear a mask and follow strict safe
distancing protocols. Table 1 provides a summary of the participants interviewed. In an effort to
maintain confidentiality, a pseudonym has been used for each participant.

Table 1
Summary of the Sample of Participants Interviewed
Participant Date Role
David Nov 12, 2021 Senior school leader
Andrea Nov 16, 2021 Senior school leader
Claire Nov 26, 2021 Senior school leader
Liz
ab
Nov 29, 2021 Division administrator
Mark
b
Dec 01, 2021 Division administrator
Helen
b
Dec 07, 2021 Division administrator
Rachel
b
Dec 09, 2021 Division administrator
Mike
b
Dec 13, 2021 Division administrator
Erin
a
Dec 13, 2021 Division administrator
Patrick Dec 14, 2021 Senior school leader
Craig
a
Dec 16, 2021 Division administrator

a
Indicates the participant also serves on the AIS senior leadership team.
b
Indicates the
participant formally commenced their current role between July 2020, and August 2021

69

The researcher has also taken care to de-identify all participant data and made every
effort to minimize the potential harm in presenting the findings in this chapter. To further protect
the confidentiality of participants and to support the process of data de-identification, The terms
division administrator and senior school leader have been used. The term division administrator
refers to a principal or assistant principal within either the middle school or high school at AIS.
A senior school leader refers to members of the school’s senior leadership team who are not also
serving as division administrators. There are three division administrators that also served as
members of the senior leadership team during the data collection process. These participants are
identified in Table 1 as Liz, Erin, and Craig.
Interviews
This chapter will discuss the key themes that surfaced after the analysis of data collected
through semi-structured interviews with senior school leaders and recently appointed division
administrators. To protect the confidentiality of participants, a numbered code and a pseudonym
have been assigned to each participant as presented in Table 1. The findings that are presented in
this chapter will help to respond to the following research questions:
1. How does AIS plan for leadership succession at the principal and assistant principal
level?
2. How does AIS support the socialization of newly appointed principals and assistant
principals?
3. How do newly appointed principals and assistant principals at AIS experience the
transition into their new roles?
The meeting transcription application Otter.ai was used to transcribe all interviews,
which the researcher then reviewed for accuracy. The reviewed transcripts were also shared back
70

with participants to ensure that they were an accurate reflection of the information and
perceptions they wished to share. Coding was used as the primary form of analysis, beginning
with a priori code informed by the researcher’s conceptual framework, before moving to open
coding to allow for new insights and understandings to emerge from the data (Maxwell, 2013;
Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). These codes were then grouped and analyzed using the coding
software ATLAS.ti to help surface the key themes shared in the remainder of this chapter.
During the 2020–2021 and the ongoing 2021–2022 academic school years were significantly
impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Social distancing measures within the host country meant
that teaching was sometimes virtual, with in-person instruction delivered with mandatory face
masks on. All large-scale faculty and schoolwide meetings were held virtually, with only small-
scale meeting possible in person. Many community members were not able to travel and see their
extended family for long durations of time, and those that were able to travel would often have to
serve quarantine. This was the case for the externally hired school leaders who participated in
this study and was often the case for the new faculty members they supported. It is also
important to note that at the time of the study, AIS experienced a significant increase in the
number of resignations, which included that of the middle school principal. This resulted in the
promotion of a middle school assistant principal immediately before this study’s first interview.
In addition, the school was also embarking upon a significant campus upgrade project. It is
possible that these contextual factors may have influenced the themes that are discussed in the
following sections.

71

A Culture of Growth and Feedback
One of the central goals of leadership is to help build capacity for improved employee
performance (Heifetz et al, 2009a; Leithwood et al, 2008). High impact school leaders look to
establish a productive school climate centered on trust, efficacy, and teamwork so they may
facilitate the kind of courageous conversations necessary to sustain continuous school
improvement efforts (Grissom et al, 2021). This section examines the themes that emerged from
participants in relation to a culture oriented towards growth and feedback, a commitment to
coaching, and practices that support a learning organization.
Consistent throughout the senior school leader interviews was an acknowledgement of a
recent shift in organizational culture, with an increased emphasis on coaching and growth. David
emphasized that AIS aspired to be a place that was deeply invested in the growth of its
professionals, and a place where people feel that their “professional autonomy is valued and
respected.” Erin discussed how under the previous superintendent the focus was strategic change
leadership, and while that was still a feature of the current team, there was now a greater
emphasis on instructional leadership, coaching and feedback. This sentiment was echoed by
Andrea, Craig, and Helen, with Andrea also explaining that it was no longer enough to be a
school of high achieving students—AIS had to ensure that students are growing in ways that are
a direct result of its practices. Supporting student growth by ensuring quality tier one instruction
for all was similarly spotlighted by Patrick who explained that the “revolution was done” and
that a significant factor in the recruitment of Liz was her capacity as an instructional leader, a
viewpoint shared by the majority of participants.
All participants discussed the benefits of working with their own executive leadership
coach, a change that Claire attributed to the current superintendent. She also highlighted the
72

leadership appraisal process (implemented three years ago), as a recent change that has expanded
the avenues for feedback. As part of this process, leaders are expected to present their strengths
and areas for growth to their respective divisions. Helen, Erin, Craig and Mark all cited this
process as a mechanism for school leaders to model reflection and continue to build a culture that
supports growth. In fact, the notion of a school leader as a reflective practitioner was referenced
in ten of the participant interviews and identified by Andrea as a key competency that is targeted
in any leadership recruitment process at AIS. Several participants also highlighted the
importance of owning and learning from mistakes with Helen, Craig and Erin referencing the
evolution of the learning community spaces in their division as an example of the culture of
reflection and growth that they were looking to promote.
The roll out of the professional learning community (PLC) coach model was referenced
by all participants as a symbol of the school’s investment in the growth and development of its
teachers. Helen stated “it’s like a huge red flag being waved by the Office of Learning—we
really need to invest in people and help them grow.'' Liz explained that the roll out of this PLC
Coach model had also created an opportunity for her divisional administration team and PLC
coaches to learn alongside one another, with all of them new to the work of instructional
coaching. Mark, Craig and David all agreed that while the overriding purpose of the model is to
provide teachers with more coaching and feedback to improve their practice, an ancillary benefit
which is not inconsequential, is the development of future school leaders.
More than half the participants identified the previous middle school instructional coach
model as an exemplar in terms of succession planning and future school leader capacity building.
The fact that three of the four administrators in the middle school division will have been
promoted internally next year, with two coming from instructional coaching positions, certainly
73

adds weight to that claim. It may also help to explain why participants unanimously identified
significant value to the practice of coaching.
A Commitment to Coaching
In almost every interview, the power of coaching was a prominent theme. Mark, Helen,
and Rachel all highlighted instructional walkthroughs with the superintendent as a valuable
opportunity to be coached in the areas of instructional leadership. Despite her experience as an
instructional coach, Helen acknowledged the additional layer of now being a supervisor and was
appreciative of space to validate her thinking and explicitly practice the feedback she would then
offer her teachers.
David, Andrea, and Erin all found value in the language of cognitive coaching as a
framework to support their immediate team and direct reports. Andrea explained that AIS was
lucky to have an incredibly talented school leadership, and that approaching conversations this
way helped to facilitate the reflection and ideation that would eventually lead to colleagues
solving their own problems. This idea was echoed by both Helen and Mark, with Mark
discussing the importance of partnership and listening if the end goal is a higher degree of
ownership and empowerment. Mark was also reflective in sharing how his stance on coaching
had evolved, explaining that he would have been “fairly dismissive of it a few years ago, but
now, having someone coach me and seeing that in action, I value it infinitely more than I
anticipated I would.”
The majority of participants also cited coaching as a framework to facilitate their own
learning, with Rachel explaining that her cognitive coaching training has really supported her to
enter new spaces, ask questions, and really seek to understand. Mark echoed this sentiment,
explaining that as he got better at coaching, he could see his sphere of influence and support
74

increasing as such skills would transcend the subject domain of his past teaching experiences.
Mike also highlighted the importance of developing a language to support his own learning, and
that often, he found himself in situations in which he needed to lead and learn concurrently. This
“leader-learner combo” was something he felt was targeted in his interview process. Andrea
confirmed the importance of coaching capacity for leaders at AIS explaining “that’s the core
element of their job. So, for the principals it’s coaching their deputies. For the deputies, it’s their
teacher leaders.” Helen agreed, explaining that even now in her role she was “100% still a
coach.”
Finally, Andrea, Liz, Helen and Erin all spoke to the importance of coaching agility,
which Liz referred to as the ability to “flex between the ultra-cognitive, to the instructional, to
just being more directive.” Interestingly, of those four participants, three are vastly experienced
school leaders while the other had 5 years as an instructional coach prior to commencing her
current role. Erin and Craig both explained that the role of instructional coach had been
specifically designed with future school leadership in mind, with Erin explaining “if anybody in
the school has the clearest vision of what the mental model of our future looks like, outside of
this administrative office, it’s those three coaches.'' Findings related to the instructional coach as
a steppingstone role and the pathway to the principalship will be the subject of further discussion
in a latter section.
Practices That Support a Learning Organization
Throughout their interviews participants continued to describe AIS as a learning
organization, a place in which colleagues are invested in each other’s growth. Helen captured
this organizational priority explaining “It’s like the most important work that we’re doing.
Investing in students, investing in teachers, investing in learning and growth. And if we don’t
75

have time for that, then why are we here?” Liz reinforced this view emphasizing the importance
of developing a culture, together with systems and structures that support learning and reflection.
Craig was similarly emphatic in stating that “anyone who thinks they’re there, then they should
retire. They’re done”, a viewpoint shared when emphasizing the challenge of complacency in
pursuit of continuous improvement.
Feedback Channels
The importance of school leaders establishing a variety of feedback channels was a
dominant theme in relation to supporting a learning organization. Patrick felt that the current
superintendent had done a masterful job in engaging stakeholder perspectives to truly understand
the organization before making changes. This emphasis on community voice was shared by
Andrea who discussed how the work of developing and implementing the current strategic plan
had very much been informed by ongoing stakeholder feedback, an intentional evolution from
the previous plan.
Claire pointed to the leadership surveys and appraisal processes as formal channels, but
also highlighted talent retention as an informal mechanism for feedback. Erin and Craig offered
similar thoughts regarding the recruitment process, suggesting the quality and depth of the
applicant pool as a means of affirming the current work and direction of the school. Claire also
identified exit interviews with departing colleagues as an excellent source of feedback, though
she did express concerns about the validity of such data explaining that she was often left
wondering “what is it you’re not telling me?” She added that while the school had started to add
more anonymous channels, and that feedback had started to look a little different, there was still
work to do in terms of trust and wondered if some of the fear around feedback was related to the
fact that so many employees were on a 1-year contract.
76

Erin and Helen both emphasized the crucial role that regular cycles of feedback and input
play in informing the work within their division. However, both acknowledged the need to be
thoughtful in how you utilize people’s time, with Erin commenting “you’ve got to be very
cautious that when you ask for feedback, it’s for something that you really need it for.” Claire
suggested this as an area of growth for AIS, explaining that there were occasions when she felt
her feedback had been sought in areas where the outcome had already been determined.
Organizational Conditions
Several participants discussed the need for leaders at AIS to help establish the conditions
necessary to support growth. For Andrea, David and Patrick, empowering teacher leaders and
models of distributive leadership were important factors in ensuring that the strategic plan came
to life in every classroom. For Andrea in particular, it was important to position teacher leaders
not just as advocates of the work, but as teacher leaders who are comfortable providing the kind
of constructive feedback that can help shape the school’s future thinking. In reference to the roll
out of the PLC Coach model, she explained “my thinking now is different to my thinking back in
August, which is different to my thinking back in April, because of teacher leaders.”
Framing change as an iterative learning process informed by ongoing feedback was a
recurring viewpoint across interviews. Erin, Helen, Liz, and Craig all spoke of the dangers of a
perfectionist culture and the need to instead establish a culture that reframes mistakes as
opportunities for growth. In reference to her instructional coaching team, Liz explained how she
had shared that mistakes were a natural part of the growth process and “what matters is how we
learn.” Erin discussed one of the mantras of her division is the idea that “we’re not going to
break these kids” and expressed that what’s important is how we show to our students and
colleagues what we’ve learned as a consequence of those mistakes. These comments, together
77

with the earlier discussion on modelled reflection, led the researcher to conclude that
professional learning is optimized when the organizational environment encourages and
challenges its employees to be reflective about their practice. The dimensions of effective school
leadership will continue to be discussed in the next section.
The Dimensions of Effective School Leadership at AIS
Leithwood et al (2008) argued that school leader effects on student outcomes were most
powerfully mediated through staff motivation, commitment, and working conditions and that the
most exceptional school leaders draw on the same repertoire of the following four core
leadership practices: building vision and setting directions; understanding and developing
people; redesigning the organization; and managing the teaching and learning program.
Similarly, more recent research from Grissom et al. (2021) identified promising evidence that
successful principals have high degrees of proficiency in the areas of instructional leadership,
managing and developing people, and organizational management. This section will share the
findings that emerged in relation to participants perceptions of effective school leadership at AIS.
Communication: Building Vision and Setting Directions
A school leader’s communicative competence was a prominent theme throughout the
interviews, with the importance of building a compelling vision highlighted by the majority of
participants. Although David was keen to stress the importance of instructional leadership, he
also championed the role of visioning in establishing school culture and supporting change
management. Craig, Erin and Mike all began with vision with Erin and Craig both identifying
the strategic backward planning from the ideal state as the most impactful components of their
work. Craig also explained how the work of selling the vision began with the recruitment
process. However, he cautioned that leaders need to be clear about those components that are
78

aspirational, and those that align with the current reality, suggesting that this had been an area of
growth for AIS in the past. Andrea, David, and Mike all referenced visioning in relation to
stakeholder engagement, with Andrea explaining how important it was that all community voices
were captured within the school’s vision for the future.
Clarity in relation to change, decision making and purpose was also a recurrent theme.
Erin explained that so much of her work was influencing and “really socializing those whys and
hows.” She also expressed one of the challenges of being in an international school with a
transient community is that “the communication is never done.” This viewpoint was reiterated by
Craig when he shared that “nothing is ever implemented with fidelity without constant revisiting.
Constant.”
For Mark, “clear is kind” was a foundational element for effective school leadership, with
a focus on transparency in decision making. This was especially important for Erin in instances
in which she had to be the public face of a decision. She spoke to the value in leaders “making
their thinking visible” and discussed a past frustration in which a leader’s decision had not
seemed to match with the discussions that had taken place. Craig also spoke to the value in
modelling his thinking, a practice he engaged in regularly with the teacher leaders he coached.
More than half the participants referenced navigating challenging conversations as a
prominent feature within their role. Erin, Helen, and Rachel, all cited explicit practice and
coaching with a colleague or mentor as a helpful support. For Craig, those conversations he had
around vision and purpose during the hiring process were a helpful and intentional third point.
This strategic foresight to take a longer-term view and consider the wider implications to the
system was also shared by David, who when coaching a colleague explained that “everything is
79

precedent” in the eyes of the AIS community. The next section will take a closer look at the
themes related to instructional leadership.
Instructional Leadership: A Focus on Student Learning
The importance of school leaders orienting their work toward instructional leadership
was a dominant theme across interviews. In reference to recruiting effective principals, David
explained “I start with instructional leadership. It’s the ability to understand what good
instruction is and to help your teachers grow into very strong teachers who consistently deliver
positive learning experiences for students.” He also explained how much of his time is devoted
to classroom walkthroughs and observations with the school’s assistant principals, a practice he
referred to as a “direct investment in their instructional leadership and coaching.” Andrea was
also in alignment as she discussed how the role of the assistant principal at AIS had evolved over
the past 7 years to now have a “really core instructional focus.” She also explained that the filter
she used in recruiting the two recently appointed AIS principals had been “is this person going to
be able to lead conversations around learning in a way that is going to take it from theory into
practice?”
Mark, Helen, Liz, and Craig all stressed the extent to which they view instructional
leadership as the core feature of their divisional work. Both Mark and Liz spoke to the
importance of calendaring their time to prioritize observation and feedback cycles. Mark stressed
the relationship between good instructional leadership and student outcomes. Liz reiterated this
point and was also keen to dial in the intentionality of this work explaining that in the past, AIS
had perhaps been what she referred to as a “lucky organization” and that now it needed to be a
“leading organization” in the realm of instructional practice.
80

Both Helen and Craig defined success in their roles in terms of the quality of learning
they observe in their students. Both prioritized levels of student engagement, student agency and
students carrying the cognitive load as indicators of good instructional practice within their
division. Helen mentioned that one of the most positive aspects about her transition was that she
was still able to impact instruction in a way that was meaningful for students. She shared several
anecdotes about teachers implementing the feedback that she had shared in her post-observation
discussions.
Craig, Erin, and Helen all discussed how their division had made structural changes to
prioritize growth in the instructional practice for teachers. The current leadership team had
worked together for 7 years, and early in their tenure Craig and Erin explained how they had
restructured their technology department to leverage an additional instructional coach. Erin and
Helen referenced another example in which they had wanted all teachers within their division to
understand and develop a common language around the inquiry process. They had also wanted
kids to have time to design their own learning and move forward with a divisional goal of
increasing student agency. Erin explained that they knew teachers would be concerned about
instructional time, they wanted students to be freed from subject disciplines and truly explore a
passion, and they also wanted this to be a low stakes environment. Consequently, they decided to
roll out the project in the Advisory program. And in that process, Erin points out that “all the
teachers learnt the inquiry cycle. Every single adult in the building is an advisor. And so, it’s like
sneaky PD.” These examples of structural changes to support growth in instructional practice,
which includes the roll out of the PLC Coach model, provide some tangible evidence that
suggests that instructional leadership is an emerging priority for leaders at AIS.

81

Understanding and Developing People
The value in relationships surfaced throughout the interview data, with David choosing to
define them as “the backbone in which any organization or team rests.” He singled out trust as
the key component and also highlighted classroom observations with other school leaders as an
opportunity to continue to foster those connections. For Andrea, her work during the school day
was “all about relationships and focusing on learning” which meant that much of her other work
needed to take place outside school hours. She also spoke of the relation shift that internally
promoted leaders can experience and the challenge in navigating that during the early stages of
their role – a viewpoint also shared by Helen, Rachel and Erin.
For Claire, the relational component was the number one piece that she listened for when
hiring new leaders. She spoke of the value in really knowing an employee, what their aspirations
were, as she explained “we’re not striving for perfection, we’re striving for human.” She
highlighted relationships and deeply listening to employees as areas for growth for AIS, and
wondered whether the scale of the school, and the notion that “we always say we’re too busy in a
year like this” might be contributing factors. She also felt that in taking the time to truly
understand its employees, AIS would be better equipped to engage in discussions around
developing its talent.
The majority of participants recognized the importance of relationships in supporting the
professional growth of their colleagues. Helen spoke of the social capital she had established in
her time as a coach and being able to tap into that to support growth and bring elements of the
strategic plan to life. Mark pointed to his 20 plus years of teaching experience as a mechanism
for building credibility and trust, something that he identified as “a hugely important and
significant challenge for administrators''. Mike discussed how critical it was for him to feel “like
82

my contributions could be seen” and how the relationship piece was so critical for him to thrive,
something he carries into the work of supporting his teams. For Erin, relationships informed her
ability to prioritize her time managing change. She referenced the phrase “don’t water the rocks”
in relation to changing teacher practice, and while Craig was in alignment, he also shared that
there are those teachers that simply try to “wait out administration” and suggested a variety of
approaches are necessary to support teacher growth. He also emphasized the importance of being
really strategic in onboarding new team members. This included being explicit about the current
reality and the desired state, in addition to clearly defining the role and expected contributions.
The work of building and nurturing strong teams will be the focus of the next section.
Building and Nurturing Strong Leadership Teams
School leaders primarily contribute to student outcomes indirectly through their influence of
people and features of the organization, with these linkages getting longer as the scale of the
organization increases (Leithwood et al, 2004). There continues to be significant support for
models of distributive leadership within the literature (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Hargreaves & Fink,
2012; Heifetz et al, 2009b; Leithwood et al, 2004; Leithwood et al, 2008; Spillane et al., 2007),
with several authors highlighting the development of future leadership capacity as a key benefit
(Bierly & Shy, 2013; Goldring et al., 2021; Hargreaves & Fink, 2012; Syed, 2015). Consistent
throughout the data was a recognition of such models at AIS, with the importance of building
and nurturing strong leadership teams, a common thread across all interviews.
From a senior leadership perspective, David, Andrea and Patrick all operationalized
school leader effectiveness in terms of building and leading teams, with David noting the
complexity of this work as it related to systems, culture, expectations and coaching. He also
explained the role that strong teams can play in attracting highly competent leaders to AIS and
83

emphasized one of the key priorities for any leader was “to build a strong team and to build a
succession plan.” For Patrick, designing strong teams was also an emphasis in his own leadership
as he reflected “something that I think I’ve done well in my career is spot talent, and promote
that talent into places of higher leverage.” He also cited several examples who have since moved
on to administration positions both at AIS and beyond. Mike moved beyond the design stage,
explaining that “nurturing teams, whether that’s our teachers, our teacher leaders, our students,
that’s a powerful piece to being an effective leader.”
The initial design piece was a crucial component for Andrea who explained how she had
sought input from the principals in recruiting the current high school, and future middle school
principals. She explained it was a delicate balance in supplementing and augmenting current skill
sets to help move the team forward in achieving the vision. This notion of balancing the long-
term objectives of the school with the immediate needs of the team was a common talking point.
Liz’s capacity as an instructional leader was referenced by a number of participants as being the
crucial factor in her recruitment. Her experiences in her previous role as a principal supervisor
was something she felt she could lean on as she looked to build capacity in her new team’s
instructional coaching, as she explained “this team hasn’t done that work.” Mark, Helen and
Patrick also all cited the loss of institutional memory from departing leaders as a crucial design
consideration.
Assessing the needs of the school was a highly collaborative process according to most
participants, and in the case of recruiting school leaders, Patrick, Claire and Andrea all noted
partnering with a recruitment consultant as a mechanism to better understand those needs from
multiple stakeholder perspectives. However, Erin, Andrea and Craig also felt it was important
that school leaders were empowered to make decisions in designing their own teams. This
84

appeared to be a feature at AIS with both Liz and Craig explaining their involvement in
recruiting their future administration team members prior to their formal commencement of their
new AIS principal roles. The importance of launching strong leadership teams was also a
common theme, with participants identifying portfolio design, calibration, and collaborative
leadership approaches as crucial factors. These elements are discussed in the following sections.
Strategic Portfolio Design
Craig described AIS as “pretty unforgiving and unrelenting” when it comes to learning
the job and explained that “there’s got to be a level of expertise and support on that existing team
if you’re going to bring people on who haven’t done it.” Both Erin and Andrea agreed, with Erin
explaining that any external candidate without a formal administrator position was not even
considered in the recent recruitment for the assistant principal role. For Craig, there was
recognition that an internal candidate will know the context, while with an external candidate,
you have to be sure they know the role. An internal and external candidate will be filling the two
assistant principal positions in his team next year, and in designing their portfolios, he saw
opportunities to create some interdependencies.
In reference to her current divisional leadership team, Helen explained that their
portfolios of work hadn’t really shifted, despite the team being together for 7 years. Both Mike
and Craig shared similar views, with Mike noting how he could see a team member in danger of
being typecast with so much of the systems and safety work being delegated his way. Craig
explained that it’s easy to become too specialized in larger schools, and consequently not acquire
the depth of experience necessary to push on to the next level. Patrick appreciated the role of the
institution in this regard and explained how his previous superintendent had highlighted board
exposure as an opportunity for growth, arranging for him to be part of the board finance
85

committee during his time as assistant principal. Andrea valued self-advocacy, as she explained
how a recently appointed principal had sought her out to share “I really want to be a principal
some time. What do you think is missing?” She explained how interaction with the board was a
potential area and arranged for him to be involved with a strategic plan task force.
One area that many participants saw as a strength was the fact that assistant principals
were empowered to make decisions in the hiring process. Mark, Helen, Erin and Craig all
explained that in many other international schools, this was firmly within the principal’s domain.
Mike, Andrea, Erin, and Mark all cited working with the budget as still being a principal level
responsibility at AIS, though Mike explained that his new principal felt there was an opportunity
for more budget related work to be delegated. Mark also highlighted visioning, setting directions,
and community engagement as the work of a division leader, identifying his role as more of a
support in those instances.
Helen described a proactive approach as she explained several self-initiated moves she
had made to combat the institutional memory that was departing her team. These related to work
around the campus upgrade, the STEM committee, and the recommendations from the recent
math review. Claire’s assessment was that AIS had room for growth in terms of strategic
portfolio design, describing the current approach as “reactive” and advocated for increased levels
of intentionality. This view was also shared by David, who in reference to internal principal
candidates explained “often there's instances that you'd want to find another principal. These
folks don't have the depth of experience. Well, it's really up to us to decide what the depth of
experiences and challenges the deputy principals get to have.” Liz suggested that the notion of
capacity building should not be seen by leaders as an extra as she explained “have them do the
work alongside you.” However, before a team can begin to operate collaboratively, they must
86

trust that all members have a clear definition of what the work is. Themes related to the role of
calibration and launching strong teams are discussed in the next section.
Launching Strong Teams: Calibration and Institutional Coherence
Taking the time for teams to calibrate and be aligned was viewed by the majority of
participants as an essential ingredient to launching strong teams. Mark really appreciated the
time his team had dedicated to calibration, explaining that need had been heightened as he now
felt a greater level of responsibility in speaking for the institution. Mike contrasted a typical day
at AIS with his last school and shared “80% of my day is now scheduled” noting that the
majority of meetings were dedicated to calibration in some form. He cited calibration on the
hiring procedure as a recent focus, something echoed by both Mark and Rachel. Rachel also
highlighted how calibration was an essential first step for any new team explaining “there are all
sorts of things that you’re still working on beyond figuring out your priorities.” For her it was
essential that leadership teams establish a set values and guiding principles that drive consistent
decision making.
Liz discussed how calibration had been a prominent feature of her divisional teams early
work in instructional coaching. She also appreciated her time with her principals’ team in
supporting a systems perspective, though she did note “I don’t know what appetite we have as a
school to be calibrated.” Patrick shared similar concerns with cross divisional alignment,
suggesting this might be an area for future growth. Andrea identified the continuity in central
leadership, and specifically her role, as a factor that can help support institutional coherence and
calibration, though she did note that this was not easily replicable.
While calibration, establishing goals, and navigating new team dynamics continued to be
surfaced throughout the interviews, there were participants who saw some advantages to forming
87

entirely new teams. Erin and Craig both discussed the initial launch of their team 7 years and
how they had both felt less pressure to be calibrated with the current status quo. Erin explained
that when they arrived, there was no one on the team to say “we do it this way” which had some
advantages in interrogating current practice and moving the division forward, a viewpoint also
surfaced by Mark, Liz, and Mike. However, Erin also noted that it took “3 years to really gel as a
team and get to a point where we felt like we were solid enough to now start to focus outside of
this unit.” Claire highlighted a challenge of leadership turnover, explaining that the loss of
institutional memory in the high school had required her to step in and support in a different
capacity to her typical role. She attributed this to the nascency of the team and explained that
there’s an “extra layer” in ensuring all the pieces across the system fit.
The ability to build effective systems that support and sustain the leadership team's
objectives was cited by both Mark and Liz as a key facet of a high quality principalship. Mark
highlighted the goal setting meeting with his faculty at the start of the year as a mechanism to
support alignment with the school’s vision. While Helen didn’t disagree, she did call for this
institution to be mindful of the current moment, explaining that with more faculty turnover in her
division than in years past, together with the changes in the administration team, they would
need to think differently about how they might launch their teams. Her advice was to temporarily
“forget about the huge strategic plan and focus first on building relationships in teams.” She also
discussed how she had been collaborating with the learning community coordinators in her
division to explore ways in which they might be a little more intentional in how they welcome
new faculty into the organization next year. Collaborative approaches to leadership will continue
to be discussed in the next section.

88

Collaborative Leadership Approaches
One of the most dominant themes to emerge across all interviews was the perspective that
AIS was a highly collaborative organization. This was especially prevalent in reference to how
leadership teams operate. In relation to his divisional team, Mark explains “our decision-making
processes are inclusive, team oriented, and team focused.” He also discussed how a current
practice of the school is to now “actively seek out dissenting views” in pursuit of better decision
making. Helen and Erin shared similar observations with Erin explaining how one member of
her team “slows us down and makes sure that we are really thinking about what the worst critic
would say” to help ensure they arrive at the best possible outcomes. Craig shared the perspective
that a key piece to being a principal was the idea “don’t hold anything yourself. It's got to be
collaborative. It's got to be shared” and that principals have to empower their team to be the
experts in their respective areas.
Helen, Craig, and Erin all referenced the flat leadership structure within their divisional
team, with Helen expressing that her principal “believes in distributive leadership. She believes
in cultivating people” while also explaining that “I never feel like she's my boss until a final
decision has to be made. And then she's willing to carry the load of the decision making.”
Andrea also viewed her role in supporting the principals as highly collaborative. She explained
that her role positioned her to have an acute awareness of the “big-ticket items that can't fail” and
in supporting her principals she would often ask “how can we partner together so that I can help
you deliver?”
Several participants did point to some factors that can constrain a more collaborative
approach to leadership. For instance, Rachel shared that “we’re a busy team and everyone has a
different portfolio of work, so we don't always interface and interact.” She went on to explain
89

that she missed some of that connectivity that comes with collaboration. She and Mark also
explain that their team would often come together for what Mark referred to as a “mini retreat”
as the culminating aspects of their various projects came into focus. He viewed the purpose of
these retreats primarily through the lens of calibration suggesting that the team needed to be “au
fait enough with the details that they can represent and speak to it.”
The notion of AIS as a busy organization, with workflow sometimes constraining
collaboration, was reiterated by Erin, Mark, Helen and Craig, all of whom discussed the dangers
of what Erin described as “the urgent superseding the important.” The unpredictable nature of an
administrator's workflow was precisely why Craig felt collaborative leadership and a sense of
shared ownership were so crucial as he shared “it's all fine and dandy for me to be running a PLC
meeting until someone punches somebody. And then for 2 days, I'm gone.” This emphasis on
collaboration was shared by Helen who explained that “no decision is really made in this office
without multiple people putting their heads together to talk through what the best solution should
be”, something she attributed to the high degrees of trust and empowerment her principal had
engendered in the team.
Perhaps it is the notion of trust that can help to explain what appeared to be divisional
differences in the extent to which collaboration was a core operating principle in the respective
leadership teams. Part of that might also be a function of the fact that for one team, this is their
first time operating together, while for the other, they have a 7-year shared experience. The next
section will take a closer look at the themes related to leadership development at AIS and may
spotlight some opportunities for leaders to empower their future team members prior to them
formally landing a role.

90

Developing Future School Leaders
Failing to plan for a change in leadership is one of the most common sources for derailing
school improvement efforts (Hargreaves & Fink, 2004; Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Lee,
2015; Leithwood et al, 2008). Most leading organizations prioritize leadership development and
succession planning as key improvement processes (Bierly & Shy, 2013), yet it is rare for school
systems to accurately anticipate their next leadership vacancy, and rarer still to have a qualified
internal candidate ready to assume the role (Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). This section
spotlights the themes that emerged related to developing future school leaders at AIS. These
include the systems that support talent identification and development, steppingstone roles and
the pathway to the principalship, and the role of the principal in mentoring future school leaders.
The role of the assistant principal was viewed by the majority of senior school leaders as
being fundamental to sustaining school leadership and a key piece in the succession planning
puzzle. David highlighted the importance of ensuring that the assistant principals were given a
level of responsibility, challenge and support to close the gap and effectively prepare them to
step into the shoes of the principal. He explained “if you’re finding your leadership pipeline is
not as strong as it needs to be, then it’s really important to go back to where you link that
pipeline starts and sharpen its origins.” He also shared that principals needed to be thoughtful in
how they scoped their jobs, suggesting that what was truly strategic and important was to “build
a team and build a succession plan.” Together with Andrea and Patrick, he saw tremendous
potential in the power of teacher leaders and referenced the new PLC coach model as an
opportunity to develop future leaders.
Andrea pointed to a host of examples that she felt illustrated a commitment to developing
leadership capacity at AIS. These included the school’s doctoral program, a commitment to
91

models of distributive leadership, the school’s leadership cohort, and a variety of curriculum
specialist roles. Helen rattled off a similar list and was emphatic in describing the range of
middle level leadership opportunities within her division. She acknowledged there was always
room for growth “but I think we’re doing pretty well” was her overall assessment.
Claire felt there were some opportunities in how AIS was mapping and developing its
talent, explaining that international leadership development plans were not commonplace and
that the approach in the past had often been reactive. Patrick, Liz and Mike shared similar views
as they explained how the approach to succession planning had not always been intentional. Liz
commented “I don’t think we necessarily lead with saying that this is a priority.” However, in
stating her personal perspective she also shared “a permanent part of my role is to always think
about who is going to be my successor.” For her, this capacity building was about sustaining the
work so that schools can thrive when a principal inevitably steps away. She did point to the
middle school division as an exemplar in succession planning, with two of their current assistant
principals moving into principalships next year. However, she attributed this to the work of the
current principal, rather than the broader institution and summarized “I think we have some
pockets, where we are thinking organizationally about leadership pipeline, but I don’t think it’s
as fluid yet.”
The importance of developing a wider systems view, being able to lead adult learning,
and implement at scale, continued to be surfaced as opportunities that supported leadership
development. Erin outlined these skills when discussing the recruitment of an additional assistant
principal and shared that she continues to work to develop her middle level leaders with this
target in mind. Succession planning appeared to be a priority for her as she shared “I think you
do everything you can to be able to work yourself out of a job.” She also chose to define her
92

success in terms of the advancement of the team members she led. Patrick shared a similar
perspective in reflecting on his time as a principal, explaining that when he was hiring, he
“looked for people that wouldn’t be in the deputy role for too long.” He also pointed to the
middle school instructional coaches as a fertile ground for future school leaders, as evidenced by
the recent internal promotion of two to the role of assistant principal. There was also an
implication of a proof of concept for this pathway from Erin. She explained that across the last 5
years they had hired in at least six teachers who were previously instructional coaches at their
last school. Both she and Craig viewed the quality of the pool of applicants they were able to
attract as affirmation of the work that was taking place in their division.
Hiring and developing future school leaders is only one piece. Mark explains that beyond
training and developing future leaders, the school has to then think about its ability to provide
advancement opportunities. Even for an international school of this scale, there are only so many
assistant principal positions in each division. He also points to that transient nature of
international schools, a concern also surfaced by Helen who spoke to the challenge of “holding
on to people with tremendous potential” when there is no immediate advancement opportunity,
and the host country isn’t your home. Finally, Craig offered a perspective that surfaced a broader
issue with leadership in education, explaining “education is really one of the only professions
where people move into administration with no training or limited training.” Such an assertion
might help to explain why a degree of intentionality in leadership development was still in its
emergent stages at AIS.
Talent Identification: Talent Mapping and Tapping
While the majority of participants highlighted the importance of identifying its potential
future leaders, the systems to support that work appeared to be evolving. David, who was now in
93

his third year at the school, explained that once a year, the leadership team would try to do “what
we call a talent mapping exercise.” This involved analyzing employees across the organization to
identify who the aspiring assistant principals might be. This was a practice he felt had
successfully supported succession planning at his last school district. Andrea, Helen, Craig and
Erin all referenced talent mapping as they considered who might be best placed to take on the
PLC Coach roles for the following year. However, Andrea was keen to stress that talent mapping
“was not about who’s in, and who’s out” explaining that the focus was really about identifying
the leadership development needs of the faculty and differentiating a support strategy
accordingly.
Claire felt this was still an emerging practice as AIS, and while there were a number of
different mapping tools out there, she described the approach at AIS as being “here, we know
who our top performers are, and we think about it, but we don’t intentionally talent map the way
that we could.” She explained that discussions had taken place about the “nine-box talent
mapping tool” that she had used at her previous organization, but that they hadn’t moved forward
to the implementation of development plans. She also wondered whether AIS had become
complacent in its approach to succession planning as she shared “I think we got comfortable
because people weren’t moving.” She identified talent mapping as an initial step towards a
desired state in which every leader has a succession plan in place. She also shared that even
though the middle school division had been “held up as an example of doing a really great job in
succession planning, it was never formalized.”
Though not a formal process, many participants recognized the impact of tapping, either
on their own career paths, or those of the people they had supported. Andrea, Helen, Rachel and
Erin all spoke to moments in their career in which they had been “tapped” for various positions.
94

Helen and Erin both discussed not initially having aspirations to be in administration and singled
out the role of various mentors in encouraging them to take the leap into leadership. However,
Helen did have concerns about bias and access, explaining that although she was initially tapped
to move into leadership, she was the first female assistant principal in her division in 15 years.
Patrick explains that the initial “invitation takes almost nothing” and that only when someone
expresses a belief in their leadership capacity do they take the leap because people often “haven’t
really comprehended themselves in that light.” He shared similar concerns around bias, and
while he acknowledged that gut and intuition inevitably play a role, he advocated for a “fair and
unbiased process” in which candidates must compete with their peers in accessing leadership
development roles. This sentiment was echoed by Claire who expressed “there are still people on
my list that I know are really talented that I've worked with, and I feel that if they don't get into
those roles, they may be less noticed.” The next section will focus on the themes that emerged in
relation to these steppingstone roles, together with participants' perceptions of the pathway to the
principalship at AIS.
Steppingstone Roles and the Pathway to the Principalship
Recent research from Goldring et al. (2021) argues that the assistant principal role should
be redesigned with a greater emphasis on instructional leadership in preparation for the
principalship, and that principals should be more intentional about designing the work to align
with this purpose. The emerging emphasis on instructional leadership at AIS has been discussed
in an earlier section. Reconceiving the role of the assistant principal with this end in mind was a
common theme across interviews.
David, Andrea and Liz all spoke to the importance of investing in the instructional
leadership capacity of the assistant principals. David was keen to highlight the role of AIS in
95

ensuring the assistant principals were challenged with a set of experiences that accelerated their
learning curve so that they were ready should a principal succession situation arrive. Andrea
acknowledged that operations were still within the assistant principals’ domain but that this was
“only a sliver of the pie” and that there was now a more proactive focus on leading learning. Liz
emphasized the instructional coaching work she was engaging in with her divisional leadership
team. Erin, Craig and Helen all shared that part of the reason the instructional coach position had
been such a fertile ground for future administrators was the emphasis on leading learning and
instructional leadership. Participants from both the middle and high school division also shared
how the role of the dean of student life had helped lighten the discipline load for assistant
principals, which according to Andrea, had been an emphasis in the past. In reference to how
principals should prioritize their time, David shared “hopefully your greatest value is your
strategic ability to lead that direction, not to individually manage a series of particular crises.”
He singled out discipline cases as “highly demanding, time intensive” though “not particularly
strategic” tasks that should be delegated down. The fact that the majority of this work was not
distributed to the assistant principals provides further evidence that the role had been
reconceived in terms of principal preparation.
Mark and Helen pointed to a host of teacher leadership positions that could be considered
as steppingstone roles along a pathway to the principalship. However, the importance of
developing a wider systems view was repeatedly surfaced with Andrea noting that when assistant
principal candidates are not successful, it is often because their impact is limited to the
immediate teams they are leading. Scoping such opportunities for her teacher leaders was at the
forefront of Erin’s mind, though she did note that the end goal need not always be the
principalship. Patrick referred to this as providing opportunities for people to develop a sphere of
96

influence across the organization, something that Claire also viewed as essential. For Helen, this
began with her work on her division’s research and development team. She then moved into a
specialist role of strategic plan leader on special assignment (SPLOSA), before continuing the
implementation of aspects of the strategic plan as an instructional coach. Rachel offered a
different trajectory, first stepping out of her division to work on the K–12 implementation of
recommendations from a curriculum review, before returning to lead her department and then
stepping into the assistant principal role. Mark described a different route, beginning as a
department chair before moving into a temporary administration role that had been created to
manage the additional leadership load associated with the school’s campus upgrade. As Claire
notes, this has proven to be successful preparation for the permanent positions, with all acting
assistant principals in each school division now in permanent roles.
While the majority of participants pointed to the new PLC Coach model as having
significant leadership development potential, there were divisional differences in the perceived
pathway to the principalship. In the high school, there did not appear to be consensus, whereas
those in middle school really viewed the instructional coaching role as key. As Craig notes “I
think part of the reason that a logical flow in the middle school is moving from coach to
administrator is that when you're a coach, your world becomes less [pause] it's harder to be
myopic.” Together with Erin, he also cited the level of collaboration the coaches engage in with
the administration team as essential, as was the fact that their instructional leadership was
already a “given.” Helen explained that her colleague had shared “Man, I wish that I had taken
the path that you took into this role” as he reflected on how much coaching was now a feature of
the role of an administrator at AIS. However, Patrick did share some concerns about explicitly
mapping out a pathway, the worry being the perception of “the chosen one.” Although he did
97

highlight the division’s approach to succession planning explaining that their “coaches are a
feeder program for school leadership.”
The Principal as a Mentor to Future School Leaders
From a senior leadership perspective, the principal as a mentor to future school leaders
was a dominant theme. David outlined how developing the assistant principals was an explicit
part of the principals’ role at AIS and would regularly check-in with principals throughout the
year to ask “What are you seeing? Where are you coaching them? How are you coaching them?
What growth are you seeing in their coaching?” He also explained that he was highly invested in
supporting their instructional leadership and regularly engaged in instructional walkthroughs and
observations. Andrea shared a similar perspective in sharing “You know, one of the areas that I
also, for the principals, hold them accountable to is the success of their deputy principals”
explaining that when there was an issue, she’s eager to learn how the principal is supporting and
coaching. Succession planning was also an emphasis for her in making sure that the principals
were helping to grow their teams with new experiences and opportunities so that they could
develop the “skill sets that they would need to be able to eventually move in.”
Liz and Erin both saw leadership development as a permanent part of their roles. For Erin
in particular, she saw mentoring future leaders as an opportunity for her work to continue to be
“challenging and interesting” and explained that over the past couple of years, she had started to
work with a cohort of aspiring female leaders here at AIS. This was something that her own
executive coach had encouraged her to do. She identified “cognitive coaching, making our own
thinking visible, when it’s not cumbersome, and explicit practice” as the three core skills that
support her immediate leadership team, and similarly these were the skills she leant into as a
mentor. While acknowledging the time this investment in her own team has taken, she explains
98

the upside as being “you don't have to manage them as much.” I don't ever worry now that a ball
is going to get dropped.”
Both Rachel and Helen spoke to the benefits of this mentorship cohort with Rachel
outlining the function as “it's getting advice. It's sometimes direct feedback. We practice in those
spaces as needed.” For Helen, it’s an opportunity “to come together to share our problems of
practice and to talk through what our next steps might be and how to manage those dilemmas
we're facing.” She describes Erin as a “masterful” principal and explains that a huge factor in
applying for the role was the opportunity to continue to learn alongside her, something she feels
she has been doing since she first landed the SPLOSA role several years ago. In reference to
Erin, she shares “Even though I was not anticipating stepping into this role, I think she saw
potential where I wasn't seeing potential, and she kept pushing me.”
Mark and Rachel both highlight regular check-ins with their division principal as crucial
to their development. Rachel notes the challenge of time as she shares her amazement that her
new principal “has enough time to coach all of us and to work with us the way she does plus
orient herself to a new space.” Craig also anticipates the challenge of mentoring his team and
orienting himself to a new role. He asks “what’s my capacity, as a first-year principal, to onboard
a third person” while discussing his decision to hire an experienced external candidate to join his
team next year. In other instances, mentoring was not always viewed as a big commitment.
Patrick shares that it can be as simple as having the “willingness to empower them to do things,
and lead. And then a willingness if they screw it up, to jump on the grenade for them and own it
as the leader.” While there might not be a collective understanding as to the role of mentorship at
AIS, one emerging practice is the fact that every administrator and school leader now works with
99

an executive leadership coach, a theme that is discussed later in this chapter. The next section
explores the factors related to the process of managing leadership transitions at AIS.
Managing Leadership Succession at AIS
According to Hargreaves (2005), “principals stand on the shoulders of those who went
before them and lay the foundation for those who will follow” (p. 163). However, too often
schools fail to understand and manage principal succession events to their detriment (Fink &
Brayman, 2004; Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Lee, 2015). This section will discuss the themes
related to how AIS manages succession events at the principal and assistant principal levels. The
section will explore themes that influence a decision to appoint a successor rather than run a
search process, participants' perceptions of the typical leadership recruitment process with a
focus on the role of performance tasks.
Deciding to Appoint a Successor or Run a Process
The decision to appoint a principal rather than run a search process was uncommon at
AIS, with one instance occurring in the middle school this school year, and another in the high
school almost a decade ago. Perhaps as a result, participants shared wide ranging views on the
topic. David, Andrea, and Erin shared similar views as to the advantages of the appointment and
the rationale for the decision. Erin explains that both Patrick and Andrea were aware that she was
considering moving on and that her assistant principal was ready. In advocating for him to take
the role she asked, “can you describe the person who would actually be able to unseat the very
obvious heir apparent?” She explained that with a higher degree of resignations than in past
years, and many faculty still to sign their contracts, the division needed clarity on its future,
especially since another assistant principal was also departing to a principalship at another
school. Andrea agreed, and explained that her hesitation was not in reference to the decision to
100

appoint, it was more around “what would the politics of it be? How would we talk about it?” She
was also clear that had the other assistant principal not been moving on, they would have
definitely run a process and again referenced the quality of Erin’s succession planning. David
acknowledged the uncertainty and instability around the pandemic, but also felt that when you
had such a high-quality internal candidate any process “would feel like it lacks integrity.” He
describes his biggest hesitation in terms of the precedent this would set and expressed concern
about the implicit message that might be sent to future internal candidates when a recruitment
process is run in the future.
Claire and Patrick both felt that leadership succession events should be managed by
running a process. For Claire, the lack of consistency with what had been done with other
principalships was the primary concern, but she also felt that “a more transparent path” with a
greater degree of stakeholder input should have been explored. Patrick reflected on his own
appointment in the high school 9 years ago and felt that it had created animosity. He saw
parallels with the current appointment, noting the quality of succession planning in the division
at that moment, together with timing within the strategic planning cycles, as he shared “in my
case, I was appointed to the role because they looked at it and said, how could anyone come in
and really get up to speed quickly, and then take over all these projects?”
Craig explains that one of the advantages of the appointment was that it affirms the
current direction of the school and sends a message of “hey, we’re not kidding.” He also stressed
how hard it would have been to do a principal search in October explaining “we saw in the high
school how it paralyzed everything twice in four years.” This would have been especially true
given that the appointed principal would take the lead on hiring for the assistant principal
positions. There can also be imperfections within any hiring process too. As David explains
101

“someone who's really good and I know, I would take in a heartbeat over someone who looks
really good, who I don't know.” Throughout his interview he advocated strongly for succession
planning. This is something that Erin verifies when recalling a conversation with David in which
he had shared “you know, in any other industry, if your deputy wasn't ready to step into your
shoes, you would be considered a failure.” For now, appointments were not the norm at AIS, and
leadership recruitment processes were typically how principal and assistant principal succession
events were managed.
The Typical Leadership Recruitment Process
Claire, David and Andrea all share that any divisional leadership recruitment process
begins with a redrafting of the job description to ensure it reflects the current needs of the school.
David explains that for the most recent principal search in the high school, he took an active role
in drafting the job description in an attempt to state in “clearer and stronger terms, here’s what
we want from you.” He described the previous example as a “standard job description” that he
“felt was a little bit dry” and made an intentional shift to really emphasize “developing and
helping people grow, and leading a caring, vibrant and inclusive culture.” Andrea confirms a
move from change leadership to instructional leadership in the job descriptions for principals and
describes a key emphasis as moving conversations around learning from theory into practice.
Claire explains that when recruiting a principal, AIS will often engage an external search
firm to help expand the pool of high-quality applicants. However, for assistant principals she
shares “we always get a rich pool. In my time here we've never had to go to a recruitment
consultant for that.” Patrick, Andrea, Claire and David all describe a highly collaborative
relationship with the external search firm. Andrea and Claire describe the co-construction of the
job prospectus, while David and Patrick describe the analysis of stakeholder input to establish
102

the school’s strengths and weaknesses as well as stakeholder perceptions of what the school
currently needs. Claire and Andrea also discuss the role of the search firm in screening
candidates. In cases in which a search firm is not used, such as the recent assistant principal
processes, Claire explains that she and Andrea would also request a one-way video interview,
and together with the divisional principal, they will screen candidates to put forward to a panel.
Consistent across all participants who had recently experienced an AIS leadership
recruitment process, was the assessment that the process was intense, with a huge degree of
stakeholder involvement. Liz describes “interviews and town halls, and conversations from an
immense stakeholder representation.” At the panel interview stage, Helen recalls faculty
representation from a variety of subject disciplines and grade levels, together with cross
divisional administrators. Mark and Rachel share similar recollections, with Rachel referencing
13 as the number of members for her panel interview. In reflecting on the biggest difference with
past processes he had been involved with, Mike explains “Stakeholder voice. Huge, here.” He
goes on to share that he had to request for more stakeholder involvement when hiring at his last
school.
Once the panel interviews have taken place, Claire explains her role in gathering and
synthesizing feedback from panel members that is then used for probing and further inquiry
during subsequent interviews with the senior school leaders. Rachel shares her post panel
interview experience and explains that the superintendent “gave really direct feedback” sharing
some positive insights but then also sharing an “area where people have given feedback and say
you don't do so well.” She felt the objective here was to really examine how she processed
negative feedback.
103

Andrea and Claire both also speak to the importance of reference checks, with Claire
sharing that AIS requires a video call with the candidate’s past and current supervisor. She
explains “even though the person's answered it on a form, you pick up nuances through the
conversation. So, we require that before anybody gets hired.” However, before advancing to the
final rounds of the interview, candidates that have reached the panel stage must also complete
performance tasks. Mark describes this emerging practice as “trying to get at the heart of the job”
and really calling on candidates to move beyond beliefs and really “show me what you do.”
Performance Tasks
The majority of participants referenced performance tasks as a feature of a leadership
process they either experienced or led (in some cases, both). Helen describes how even across
the last 2 years the performance task piece has evolved. She explains that for her acting assistant
principal role, the task was “a scenario where I had to write an email to parents on a discipline
issue” whereas for the most recent assistant principal process, there was also a task that involved
observing a video of a lesson and sharing feedback for the teacher. Mark shared a similar
perspective and both participants saw the alignment with a greater focus on instructional
leadership. Mark also discussed how this has influenced his own team’s hiring practices as he
shares “If I want to know, if you're good at something, I want to see you do it.” Mike agrees as
he explains “people can say lots of great things, but everybody can't be doing those great things.”
He sees the addition of performance tasks and sample video lessons in the faculty hiring process
as an opportunity for him to assess the level of alignment between what is said in the interview
and what plays out in practice.
Reflecting on how she might lead her own leadership recruitment process at AIS, Liz is
adamant that performance tasks in instructional coaching and leading professional learning must
104

play a role, but she also highlights the importance of reference checks early in the interview. She
explains wanting to see “if they walk on water, before I determine if I'm going to interview them
or not.” Lastly, Helen explains that the recruitment process can sometimes be differentiated, as
she explained not having to complete one of the performance tasks in her most recent process.
She attributed this to currently being in an acting assistant principal role in which “every day is a
performance task for me now.” The next section will take a look at the themes that emerged in
relations to new leader socialization and support.
New Leader Socialization Supports
From the moment their tenure begins, principals are confronted with the responsibilities
and challenges of veterans (Bengston et al., 2013; Crow; 2006), with this lack of a mediated
entry causing stress and potential burnout (Crow, 2006). Parkay et al. (1992) explain that poorly
managed socialization can lead to principals abandoning their belief in their capacity to initiate
change, while Bengston et al. (2013) also highlight the harmful effects on self-efficacy and
retention. How new principals are socialized into organizations impacts the organization's ability
to attract and retain high potential candidates (Barnett & Shoho, 2017). These effects on
principal retention, coupled with the growing complexity of the role, suggest that the issue of
principal socialization should no longer be left to chance (Bengston et al., 2013). This section
discusses the themes related to new leader socialization and support and will include factors
around the design and implementations of transitions plans, additional organizational supports,
and self-initiated supports surfaced by the new leaders.
Designing and Implementing a Transition Plan
The importance of designing and implementing a transition plan was a theme that
surfaced throughout all interviews, though there was widespread recognition that approaches
105

should be differentiated to account for the people involved. Patrick perhaps captured this best in
saying “there’s no field manual for this” as he spotlighted the differences in internally promoted
versus and externally hired candidate’s needs. Andrea shared a similar view and used the two
most recent principal succession events in the high school to illustrate her point. In reference to
Liz’s appointment, she explained that she “never for a second worried about the tasks of being a
principal”, recognizing that her years of experience as both a principal and a principal supervisor
would serve her well, particularly on the operations front. Instead, the focus was ensuring she
landed really well relationally and had the opportunity to build an understanding of the AIS
context. In contrast, the previous high school principal had been promoted internally, and so
while he had the relationships and the context, the function of the transition plan was to “really
make sure they know the job of being a principal.” She explained that as a result, she would
“only ever consider hiring an internal deputy” and noted a benefit for the internally promoted
candidate as having the opportunity to gain those experiences while walking alongside the
current principal. She also explained that she was “having a higher level of conversation with
Craig than I ever did with Liz at this time, because he's physically here. With Liz, I had to be
pretty judicious because she had a full-on job up until she left.” The challenge of effectively
managing two roles simultaneously was something surfaced by all recently appointed school
leaders that were interviewed.
David saw transitions as incredibly stressful and described the purpose of transition plans
as “a confidence building process on all sides.” While acknowledging the opportunity to build a
level of “experience and understanding” about AIS, he also saw them as an opportunity for the
incoming leader to weigh in on decisions. Craig and Erin shared similar views and discussed
how their team had been thinking strategically about some of the decisions that the outgoing
106

members of their team might be able to make to help set up Craig for success. He explains “In an
administrator's last year, there's an opportunity to die on some of those hills you maybe didn't
want to burn the political capital on” and that some of the opportunities of the transitions are the
decisions that Erin can make that will not be a political hit for him.
Patrick highlights giving new leaders the grace and space to listen and understand context
as an important support in their first year and explains that the current superintendent “did a
masterful job of working to understand the organization before he made a lot of decisions.”
There was consensus throughout the interviews that an effective transition plan must therefore
provide lots of opportunities for new leaders to acquire and exchange knowledge. Andrea, David
and Claire explain that in the case of Liz, this began with regular check-ins with Andrea and the
outgoing principal. Liz confirms these weekly meetings, alternating between Andrea and the
outgoing principal, took place for the 6 months prior to her officially commencing the role. With
Andrea, there was often a wider systems and strategic focus, whereas with the outgoing
principal, the focus was usually divisional.
The opportunity to integrate with the divisional teams was also there. In fact, Liz notes
that one of the first things she had to do was hire two assistant principals, both promoted
internally from department chairperson positions. Craig has found himself in a similar situation
this year. Mark discussed the reciprocal onboarding that the high school team has engaged in
with the three assistant principals helping to provide the AIS context, and Liz providing the
leadership experience from her multiple roles. Mike, who had transitioned to AIS and joined the
high school team a year earlier, explains that he first began meeting with his divisional team
twice a month as early as October 2019. While he describes the initial focus as relational and
team oriented, he spoke to a variety of opportunities to share his knowledge, particularly how his
107

current school was responding to the challenges of the pandemic. He describes feeling “very
much a part of the decision making of the 2019–20 school year.” Together with Liz, they also
view their second semester virtual visit to AIS as an instrumental support.
Andrea discusses the challenge of the pandemic as it relates to transitions and shares “In
non-COVID times and travel is possible. The ability to have an external candidate come to
campus for a week is priceless. And I think I really felt that.” She explains that both Liz and
Mike also felt that, and it continued to disrupt both of their transitions, with both having to serve
quarantine upon arrival in the host country. Mike also explains that his first principal at AIS did
everything to try and create opportunities for him to connect with staff early in his tenure, but
social distancing measures often meant that those connections were virtual throughout his first
year. Liz describes a similar situation, as she explains “I’ve never been able to stand in front of
the faculty.” Andrea also shares that part of the transition plan involved several senior leadership
team retreats prior to her arrival, but again these were via video conference, with Liz in a time
zone the other side of the world. Despite these challenges, both Liz and Mike really valued the
virtual visits with Mike sharing that the experience helped support him in identifying his own
entry point into the organization.
Additional Organizational Supports
All participants shared that they were all working with an executive leadership coach, a
relatively recent practice at AIS. David described this as an incredible resource as it is “someone
who's very skilled and experienced in just the dynamics of leadership, and one aspect of it being
leadership transitions.” Andrea and Claire share that this is a resource that is made available to
all principals and assistant principals, and they try to establish these connections prior to new
leaders commencing their roles. For Liz, this began 2 weeks prior to her departure for AIS. She
108

and Andrea describe the initial self-assessment piece as crucial in transition, with Liz noting the
value of leaning into strengths but also being aware of the areas she needed to watch for.
All participants were unanimous in identifying their coach as valuable support for their
work. Mark explains that he initially did not take up the offer of working with a coach, but now
that he does, he “regrets that I didn’t do it last year.” He has found it particularly valuable in
helping him to navigate some of the emotionally charged and psychologically draining aspects of
his work. For Helen, it has been helpful in thinking through how to prioritize her role and
consider how her portfolio might evolve in the future. For Craig, the focus has been his transition
and zooming out to consider some of the “bigger picture” pieces. Erin explains how her coach
had pushed her to begin mentoring aspiring female leaders at AIS, while Patrick wondered if
there might also be an opportunity for the school to suggest some areas for the coach to focus on.
However, Andrea describes a different function as she explains “it gives them just a nice, safe
space, completely disconnected from me or from their supervisor.” She certainly sees the benefit
in supporting the transition but was keen to express that this is an ongoing support that leaders
will continue to leverage.
All recently appointed principals and assistant principals identified regular one-to-one
check-ins with their direct supervisor as an essential support. In most cases these took place on a
weekly basis, with many participants referencing the use of cognitive coaching as a mechanism
to facilitate thinking. Rachel explains there are times when her principal will also be more direct
and say, “here’s what you need to do”, which was something that both Liz and Andrea referred
to as “coaching agility.” Helen and Erin note that there are times when these meetings provide an
opportunity to explicitly practice challenging conversations. Andrea, who supervises the three
divisional principals, identified her role as one of the “most pivotal in the organization when it
109

comes to supporting school leaders.” She saw direct coaching, support managing workload, and
partnering to deliver on the broader strategic items as the three primary ways in which she
supports her teams. She also shared “I'm thinking about when I leave the organization, how do I
do it at a moment of time where there's stability in the school leadership, so that my transition
isn't upsetting” explaining that it would be disastrous to leave in the same year as one of her
principals.
Patrick explains that every new leader needs an advocate in the organization and that this
is often the role of the direct supervisor. Part of this is about supporting the work of building
relationships for these new leaders on their new teams. David explains this as another core focus
of the transition plan and that it’s always great to be able to start that process earlier. Patrick is
more direct in explaining that as an internally promoted candidate, you have access to all the
internal structures and supports at AIS and you are able to “make those connections in ways that
an external candidate cannot.” Erin and Andrea both share similar views as they discuss
supporting Craig as he begins his transition to the senior leadership team. Erin referenced
discussions that have already taken place with Craig regarding how to navigate team dynamics
when advocating for the division. Finally, Mark, Rachel, and Helen all discussed at length the
benefits of conducting classroom visits together with the superintendent. They all noted the focus
on developing their instructional leadership, with Rachel appreciating the extent to which the
focus was always redirected back to students.
Self-Initiated Supports
The importance of new leaders being able to self-assess their own entry point to the
organization and take the initiative in identifying the necessary support was also a common
theme that surfaced. Mike felt that this was a quality that was specifically targeted in the
110

recruitment process and in reference to his transition he states, “they created the space for me to
understand and achieve that on my own and really trusted me enough to know that I would see
what was needed and see where I could contribute quite quickly.” He cites the virtual visit as a
perfect example as he was able to observe another assistant principal engage in some high-
quality facilitation. This immediately caused him to reflect and assess that this is something “I'm
not so skillful at, and I was not prepared for, how can I build that up?” Mark shared a similar
story in identifying the need to learn more around the topic of diversity, equity and inclusion. He
describes taking on a significant amount of reading over the summer to support his learning in
this important area.
Helen shares two examples. First, she discussed recognizing managing student discipline
as an area for development. She first reached out to one of the school’s dean of students for some
advice and resources, but she also reached out to her principal who agreed to give her a bit of
“internship practice.” She took on the role of observing and scribing all of the interviews in a
significant social media discipline case involving upwards of 80 students. She was also
responsible for crafting the email that would go out to all the parents, a resource they have
continued to revise and use this year. In her second example, she describes asking the
superintendent, who speaks mandarin, to join her for an instructional walkthrough in the Chinese
Language classes. She explains “I don't know exactly what I'm looking for in a Mandarin
classroom” which is something she attributes to not speaking the language. Despite the fact that
she is not currently supervising these classes, she anticipates it as a possibility next year and was
eager to build her capacity to support in the future.
For Rachel, she identified providing feedback on instruction as an area of growth, and
while this is something she had been working on at the teacher-to-teacher level, she recognized
111

the change in dynamics when moving into a supervisory role. She describes reaching out to Liz
for opportunities for explicit practice. Liz describes her own self-initiated support as being her
continued relationship with her cohort from the Principal Academy Fellowship. She explains
volunteering to help coach with this cohort as an opportunity to “keep my skills sharp because
I’m not necessarily getting that push from here.”
Finally, Mike discusses drafting his own entry plan that encompassed the 6 months prior to
arrival, together with a 90-day plan upon arrival. While he acknowledges the impact of the
pandemic, he felt there was space for a more intentional approach to onboarding at AIS,
something he has shared with the human resources director too. However, he also shared that had
he been hiring for his role, he would also be looking for someone who is capable of thriving in
spite of uncertainty as he shared “I need you to be an independent thinker and be able to identify
what your needs are and what the institution's needs are and be able to just get it done.” The next
section will continue to explore new leader perceptions of their transition to AIS.
New Leader Perceptions of Their Transitions
Research shows that creating an induction process that recognizes that learning is not
random, acknowledges the fragile nature of socialization, and provides space for the divesting of
old professional identities in preparation for new ones, is essential in positioning new principals
for success (Bengston et al., 2013; Crow, 2006; Hart, 1993). Hart (1993) offers three stages that
emerge from the socialization stage theory literature: learning and uncertainty, gradual
adjustment, and stabilization. Parkay et al., (1992) propose a five-stage model for principal
socialization and identify the stages of survival, control, stability, educational leadership, and
professional actualization. Their research found that principals recalibrated their expectations for
promoting change as they moved through the stages and suggest that a principal’s eventual level
112

of professional socialization is strongly indicated by the end of the first year. This section will
discuss the themes that emerge from the data that relate to a new leader’s perception of their
overall transition to AIS, of which socialization is a prominent part. They include participants'
perspectives on their expectations of the role versus the reality, themes related to workload
considerations and establishing priorities, differences in internally promoted and externally hired
candidates’ experiences, and perceived strengths and areas for growth.
Contrasting Expectations With the Reality of the Role
While all participants reported the reality of the role differing from their expectations, the
areas of focus were wide ranging, as was the degree of difference. Liz explains being a principal
for almost 20 years and “every time I've been a new principal, you're never prepared. Right?”
She explains feeling like a first-year principal each time, with the difference being she now
knows the vision she is working towards can be accomplished. In relation to her transitions to
AIS, she explains making the assumption that some of the systemic instructional leadership work
would be further along than is this case and shares “it feels like the volume of change leadership
that needs to happen is actually more significant.”
In reflecting on his first year as an assistant principal, Mark discussed how challenging
the role has been and shared that “the issues that you start to deal with are really impactful on the
people involved.” He identifies the areas of discipline, child safety, and situations in which a
faculty member has made a mistake as “far more nuanced and complex” than he was expecting.
Transitioning from his role as a teacher leader, he shares that in the classroom he felt confident
that “any curveball would be something I could handle.” However, in this role there is less
certainty as he explains “I did not expect to learn nearly as much as I feel I've learned, and I feel
like I have so much more to learn.” He cites the importance of process in addition to outcomes as
113

an example as he shares “you can make the right decision and still make a mess of the situation.”
He describes his previous assessment that the most important thing was to make the correct
decision as being “naïve” and also explains that in managing complex processes, maintaining a
generative relationship with those involved must be centered.
Rachel expresses similar views about the magnitude of decision making but also explains
that she hadn’t anticipated not being able to be as responsive as she was in the past as she shares
“I can't always just help someone with a situation, I have to look at the system and the bigger
picture first.” She describes the hiring process as an example and explains that in sharing who
got what role, and why, one of the challenges in sharing that feedback is the knowledge that
there are “all these other external factors that drive some of that decision making.” She also
discussed an aspect that surprised her was the extent to which she needed to support some of the
“adult interaction challenges” as she described learning about “some of the nuances and
challenges that adults face” at AIS. Moving from a collaborative teacher leader role to one in
which her portfolio doesn’t always lend itself to collaboration has also been an adjustment, as
she reflects “I didn’t anticipate the isolation.”
Helen explains that Erin had actually reached out to her before she applied for the role to
talk through how the relationships she had developed as an instructional coach might begin to
pivot. She discussed how this was already something that she was beginning to feel less than a
semester into the role. In assessing those first few months she shares “I think a lot of what I was
expecting is what it has turned out to be” as she notes a level of alignment with her past role in
terms of coaching and adult facilitation. However, one aspect that has surprised her is the
complexity of the hiring process, and the number of steps involved. She had previously been a
part of the interview round, but now screening through teacher video lessons and conducting
114

multiple reference checks were added layers. Claire shares a similar concern, particularly with
the hiring challenge of this year, and worries that the burden of hiring doesn’t enable leaders to
focus on the important work in their division. Mark, Liz, Erin, Rachel and Mike all referenced
the burden of this year’s hiring process in their respective interviews.
Helen was also keen to point out some positive surprises to her work, as she shares how
much joy she gets just being able to welcome kids to school in the morning. She has also taken a
lot of pride in the instructional coaching aspects of her work, which she acknowledges is a
familiar space given her past role as a coach. One aspect that she hadn’t anticipated was the
positive response to her feedback from teachers. She explains that in sharing her observation
notes and some potential new strategies, almost every teacher has responded and said “thanks for
that good idea. I tried it and it worked.”
For Mike, entering the organization in the midst of a pandemic was naturally a distorting
factor, but even as he tried to step out of that context, he explained “I did not expect to have this
many moving parts at all times.” He identified the strategic plan, the school’s learning
aspirations, the focus on instructional practice, the shift to more data driven approaches, the
focus on diversity, equity and inclusion, and processing all of this through student well-being
against the backdrop of the pandemic, as current areas of focus. And while he felt that we had the
human capital to do all of these things he shared “I just, I felt like I wasn't ready for that. I wasn't
prepared for that.” Claire shares that this is not an uncommon concern as she discussed one of
her learnings from the exit interviews she has conducted over the years is that “work-life balance
and initiative overload is quite a significant opportunity for us.”

115

Establishing Priorities and Workload Considerations
Themes related to workload and the challenge of establishing priorities were also
prominent within the data. Mark explains “unequivocally the asset that we struggle the most with
is time” as he explains that allocation of time is not always aligned to the most important work
“and the obvious for instance I would give is spending time in classrooms. I did not spend nearly
enough time in classrooms last year.” Rachel shared a similar concern, while Mike posed a
related challenge as he explained that “80% of my day is scheduled.” He described not fully
anticipating the number of meetings, nor the amount of work that would need to get done in
between them and suggested a more accurate assessment of this reality as part of his transitions
would have been helpful.
Liz and Rachel both highlight a challenge in establishing priorities. For Liz, she explains
“I don't know what appetite we have, as a school, to be calibrated” and continues to add that
from the lens of support for an incoming principal “making sure we clearly outlined where are all
the big rocks, and which rocks are we tackling now” would have been really helpful. Rachel
explains that as a new administrator she would have appreciated support in establishing some
priorities “because as a new person, everything is important, because I'm learning so much.” She
also noted that AIS was just a busy place and that those that work there can sometimes be their
own worst enemy “with just an expectation of ourselves, as high functioning individuals, that we
aspire to do good, great things.”
Several participants spoke of the challenge of launching the school year, which Helen
described as “frenetic” though she was not ready to place the blame within her division. She felt
there was too much time dedicated to the school’s strategic objectives and the “big picture” items
and advocated instead for a “balanced focus on schoolwide strategic thinking, and then
116

implementation in our divisions.” She noted that if she could go back, she would change the
distribution of time, particularly with new teachers in the process of being welcomed to campus.
Liz shared similar concerns and explained the need for the school’s Office of Learning to also be
mindful and help principals prioritize effectively by protecting time in the division throughout
the school year.
The challenge of workload surfaced in a variety of ways across interviews. Craig and
Mike both spoke to the workload associated with the school’s curriculum review cycles, with
Craig explaining “I'm also poorly planned in that I was in a learning support review last year and
the social studies review this year, and there's an ELL review.” He explained how the campus
upgrade work is also pulling him out of the division for 10 to 15 hours a week and wondered if
he could have reallocated some of his portfolio more strategically. There is then the reality of
attending senior leadership team meetings as his transition begins and the additional burden of an
unusually demanding hiring season.
The challenge of managing two roles during a transition was something that was surfaced
by both externally hired and internally promoted participants. Mike recalls his new team wanting
to video conference during the school day and having to remind them that his priority was still
his current school. Liz shares a similar view in wanting to make sure that she was focused on the
principals she was still supporting, something Andrea confirms as she explains having to be
pretty judicious during the transition. As an internally promoted leader, Rachel explains that
while the leadership team was keen to remind her “students first” the reality was that she was
invited to most administration meetings. She also recalls being pulled out for different
workshops, and interviews and other roles “And that was really hard because of course I want to
be a part of those but you're taking me out of the classroom again and is that something that was
117

truly necessary?” Factors related to the internal promotion are explored further in the next
section.
Navigating the Internal Promotion
David explained that a major advantage for the internal candidate is that you have a much
greater opportunity to assess their readiness for the role. For Patrick, he saw an internal
promotion as a validation of the school’s current trajectory, while Andrea spoke to the benefits of
an increased timeframe to manage the transition itself, particularly in reference to building new
relationships and accessing support. Craig highlights the risk of stagnation and myopia when you
only look internally as he explains “You aren't bringing someone in who has something that you
don't have.” However, Mark put forward a counter perspective in sharing “it's not to say that we
don't have great ideas here, sometimes people just don't necessarily have the platforms to move
those forward.”
While there was consensus regarding the advantages of a longer window for transition for
internal candidates, the degree to which participants felt that this was leveraged was not
consistent. In reference to Helen, Erin shares “if you have five core skill sets you need, she was
super solid on three of them and then we were going to need to develop you know, these other
two” explaining that instructional walkthroughs and managing student discipline had been the
areas of focus in the transition. Helen also referenced these two domains as areas in which she
had sought help in preparation for the role as outlined earlier in this chapter.
In contrast, Mark explains that while the distributive leadership structure in the school
had helped develop some of the leadership skills that transcend roles, he would have appreciated
some additional opportunities to acquire skills that were “role specific” and cites discipline as an
example. He shares “there's a reasonably long window of transition in which I can then get my
118

feet wet, so to speak” and that he would have benefited from the opportunity to observe and
experience some of those complex and nuanced discipline cases before the first one landed on
his desk. He continues to advocate for a differentiated approach to transitions explaining that for
Mike, who was hired with assistant principal experience, his needs were different because when
“he walks into a discipline situation; he needs to know the rules and he knows the deal.” Mark
also wondered if there might be some benefits to shadowing someone else in the role to fully
comprehend some of its complexities, something that both Liz and Mike had shared in reference
to developing future school leaders.
There was also recognition across interviews to the importance of social capital, with
most participants discussing an advantage for internal candidates is the opportunity to build trust
and credibility in their prior teacher leader roles. Mark explains that as a former soccer coach,
teacher and department chair, he felt a level of trust that “new administrators at the school
certainly have to earn” and identified this as the “thing that has positioned me best.” Helen
shared that “relationships are everything in middle school” and that much of her past coaching
role had been about tapping into that social capital to bring “elements of the strategic plan to
life.” She did share that while she felt trusted and appreciated, she wondered how things would
evolve as a result of faculty turnover in the years to come. Rachel also highlighted the challenge
of navigating the hiring process as an internal candidate “because putting yourself out there,
you're vulnerable to rejection.”
As someone hired externally, Liz felt that she needed a greater level of awareness in
navigating relationships as she explained “had I been here 5 years, I might not have had to be
conscious of certain things.” She also shared that “I haven't found my people here” perhaps
alluding to the sense of isolation that internally promoted candidates also referenced. In the case
119

of Rachel, she missed some of the connectivity that came naturally in previous role as she had
co-taught so many classes. As a department chairperson, she felt that she could draw on her
strength of individualization and meet her small team’s needs. Scaling that to her current role
was a challenge she was currently navigating.
Craig shared a related perspective that the internal candidate can sometimes have a
tougher transition if they haven’t had the full view, explaining the dangers of over-specialization
in roles such as the department chairperson. The intentional design of the middle school
instructional coach position has been discussed throughout this chapter, and in assessing the
opportunity for additional support, Helen explains “I don't know that there's any other structure
that I would have needed because I've been a part of so much of the work already.” Further areas
of strength and opportunities for growth in relation to supporting leadership transitions are
discussed in the next section.
Further Challenges in Transition
The challenges of the current pandemic moment was a dominant theme throughout the
data, particularly in reference to building relationships. Liz and Mike both felt they would have
benefitted from an in-person campus visit as opposed to the virtual format they experienced prior
to commencing their roles. Andrea and David both shared similar views, with Andrea also
referencing the challenge of conducting the interview process virtually. She recalled how in
drafting Liz’s welcome letter to the community, they had needed to address the fact that
feedback from the faculty during the interview process “wasn't great.” Liz describes that part of
the process, recalling that faculty “all had their zoom screens off. And so, I was looking into an
abyss.” In reflecting on her first few months in the role, she saw her transition into the senior
120

leadership and divisional teams as really strong but acknowledges there is some work to do in
“bringing the faculty along.”
Mark explains a challenge in transition has been the loss in institutional memory as a
result of the recent leadership turnover that his division has experienced. Liz shared a similar
view in sharing “there are a lot of systems and structures that have existed since the beginning of
time, and no one really seems to know the why.” Erin had also discussed the importance of
attending to purpose as she explained “the communication is never done” in reference to the
transient AIS context. Helen explains that her division is already anticipating this need as they
consider how to onboard both the new faculty and their new administrators.
Several participants also described an inability to play to their perceived strengths during
the transition, with the pandemic being a related factor. Mike shared that the strengths he most
often leans into in his leadership were “relator and individualization” and as a result of the
pandemic he explains that “we just did not have space to do that.” He described having a lot of
work to do with the faculty in terms of making connections, but he has also made intentional
moves this year to “connect with kids because that's the life-giving piece of my role.” While he
appreciates the support of the dean of student life, he also shared that “one of the things that I
miss about my role here, is my role does not involve a lot of pastoral care. And that is my sweet
spot.”
Liz shared a similar view as she explained how her preference for public leadership and
modelling the way had been constrained by the local social distancing regulations. She had come
from a system in which principals would lead the majority of professional learning, while at AIS
this is often led by the Office of Learning. As a result, she explains a challenge is that “principals
don't necessarily own it.” She also expressed a concern that sometimes “we're given actions
121

without actually knowing what the outcomes we want are” and that navigating this model is
something she is continuing to adapt to.
Despite these challenges, all participants remained positive about their transitions and
were optimistic about the future. Mike spoke through the lens of a student explaining that like
them, he was anticipating what a post-pandemic AIS would feel like as he shared “Every year is
going to feel new. It's like, oh, wait, we do this?” He also felt confident in his capacity to step
into any principal role beyond AIS. Liz described feeling “very fortunate” as she explained that
so much about the transition had gone well. Rachel really appreciated her team and anticipates
both they and she will continue to get better. Mark was grateful for the opportunity to continue to
learn and be challenged and explains “it’s been remarkably rewarding, and people are incredibly
kind and supportive.” Helen took time to spotlight areas of her role that continue to bring her joy.
She was deeply appreciative of the mentorship she has received over the past 7 years and shared
“if I ever do want to become a principal, I know that I would want to function the same way.”

122

Chapter Five: Discussion
The purpose of this study is to explore how AIS plans for, manages, and supports
principal and assistant principal successions and to understand how recently appointed principals
and assistant principals experience their transition into their new roles. The study was informed
by interviewing senior school leaders involved with the process of planning, managing, and
supporting principal and assistant principal succession, as well as principals and assistant
principals who had formally commenced their current role between July 2020, and August 2021.
This chapter will summarize the key findings that emerged, making connections with the
literature outlined in Chapter 2 where appropriate. Implications for practice and
recommendations for AIS will then be discussed, before closing with suggestions for future
research and conclusions.
Summary of Findings
After an analysis of the data gather through 11 semi-structured interviews, the themes
that emerged were categorized in Chapter 4 as follows: a culture of growth and feedback, the
dimensions of effective school leadership at AIS, building and nurturing strong leadership teams,
developing future school leaders, managing leadership succession at AIS, new leader
socialization supports, and new leader perceptions of their transition. A summary of the key
findings related to these themes is presented in the following sections.
A Culture of Growth and Feedback
One of the central goals of leadership is to help build capacity for improved employee
performance (Heifetz et al, 2009a; Leithwood et al, 2008). High impact school leaders look to
establish a productive school climate centered on trust, efficacy, and teamwork (Grissom et al,
2021), providing instructional expertise and support through regular observations and coaching
123

(City et al, 2009; Fuller et al., 2018; Johnson et al. 2011). Most study participants agreed that
there was an emerging emphasis on instructional leadership at AIS, with feedback, reflection and
coaching identified as key support practices. The school’s recent investment in its PLC Coach
model was referenced by all participants as an example that AIS was a school that was deeply
invested in the growth of its professionals. While the primary focus of this model was described
as supporting teacher practice and growth, many participants also noted the potential benefits of
developing future school leaders. Similarly, all participants spoke to the advantages of working
with their respective coaches in terms of their own personal growth, a resource that all school
leaders at AIS now have access to.
There was widespread recognition that coaching was a core element of the role of school
leaders at AIS. Having the agility to switch between cognitive, instructional, and more directive
forms of coaching was viewed by several participants as an important asset in supporting the
growth of colleagues. Those participants that referenced this coaching agility were either
experienced school leaders or former instructional coaches. This might help to explain why so
many participants had identified the middle school instructional coaches as a fertile ground for
its future school leaders.
There was evidence that leaders at AIS used a variety of feedback channels to inform
their practice, and that these leaders were open to their thinking evolving as a result. However,
there were concerns as to a residual climate of fear around feedback, and a perception that
feedback was sometimes sought when outcomes were already determined. Several participants
also spoke of the dangers of a perfectionist culture at AIS and the need to reframe mistakes as
opportunities for growth. Most participants cited the modelled reflection that divisional leaders
124

engaged in as they discussed their faculty feedback as a powerful mechanism to support the shift
to a more positive culture around growth and feedback.
The Dimensions of Effective School Leadership at AIS
Leithwood et al (2008) argued that most exceptional school leaders draw on the same
repertoire of the following four core leadership practices: building vision and setting directions;
understanding and developing people; redesigning the organization; and managing the teaching
and learning program. More recent research from Grissom et al. (2021) identified the areas of
instructional leadership, managing and developing people, and organizational management as
essential components for effective principalships. Throughout the interviews, a school leader’s
capacity as an instructional leader, their ability to relate to people and support their growth, and
their communicative competency in establishing and selling the vision all emerged as key
themes.
Communication: Building Vision and Setting Directions
Effective school principals are skilled communicators who develop a common language
around learning, a shared understanding of organizational activities and goals, (Hallinger &
Heck, 2002; Hill, 2018) and can clearly articulate how their proposed ideal state relates to
improved outcomes for students (Leithwood et al, 2004). The importance of building and
sustaining a compelling vision was highlighted by the majority of senior school leaders as critical
leadership practice at AIS, though many also noted the importance of accurately assessing the
current reality and being clear on those components that were perhaps more aspirational. The
leader’s ability to provide clarity in making their thinking visible was also valued by the majority
of participants, something the researcher felt was essential given the school’s collaborative
approach to leadership and its commitment to models of distributive leadership.
125

Instructional Leadership: A Focus on Student Learning
Leithwood et al. (2004) had stressed the importance of instructional leadership as it
related to student achievement. More recent data on how principals and assistant principals are
spending their time does appear to show that instructional leadership is now a clear focus that is
paying dividends (Searby et al., 2017; Goldring et al., 2021). There was strong evidence across
all interviews that AIS was now prioritizing instruction leadership, both in terms of its leadership
recruitment processes and its approach to developing school leaders. Senior leadership team
members discussed how the job descriptions of both principals and assistant principals had
evolved to align with a greater instructional focus. In the recent leadership recruitment processes,
the emergence of instructionally focused performance tasks were also highlighted, with a focus
not only on knowledge of what good instruction is, but an ability to also lead conversations
around learning that would move from theory to practice.
Several participants discussed the superintendent making a direct investment in their
instructional leadership through coaching during instructional walkthroughs and classroom
observations. Participants from the middle school leadership team also discussed how they had
repurposed some roles to allow for an additional instructional coach several years ago. These
coaches were then charged with bringing elements of the strategic plan to life, coaching teams
rather than at the one-to-one teacher level. There were also some participants who acknowledged
that in the recent past, how they had spent their time had not always aligned with the priority of
instructional leadership, with instructionally focused interactions with teachers often sacrificed in
times of crisis management. However, the majority of participants felt that this year, with the roll
out of the PLC Coach model, the focus was clear. This led the researcher to conclude there was
126

tangible evidence to suggest that instructional leadership was an emerging priority for leaders at
AIS.
Understanding and Developing People
Great leaders know how to tap into the human dimension and create an environment
where the natural skill sets of people can develop and flourish (Heifetz et al, 2009a; Morrison,
2018). There was a strong consensus that relationships were critical to the success and
development of teams at AIS, with the relational component an essential marker in any
leadership recruitment process. One senior leader explained how they had adjusted their
workflow, conducting most of their work outside of school hours, so that they could prioritize
relationships during the regular school day.
The majority of participants highlighted the importance of relationships in supporting the
development of their colleagues, with several referencing this in relation to talent mapping their
faculty for roles such as the PLC coach positions. Morrison (2018) offered similar assertions,
highlighting trust and collegial relationships as essential if people are to feel empowered to adopt
a mindset of continuous improvement. However, some participants expressed concerns about
workload and its impact on a school leader’s capacity to deeply listen to their employees, with
the scale of AIS relative to other international school also viewed as a challenge. So, while there
was evidence to suggest that a leader’s relational capacity was highly valued at AIS, ensuring
that school leaders had the time and space to prioritize productive relationships with their
employees was an area for growth.
Building and Nurturing Strong Leadership Teams
There continues to be significant support for models of distributive leadership within the
literature (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Hargreaves & Fink, 2012; Heifetz et al, 2009b; Leithwood et al,
127

2004; Leithwood et al, 2008; Spillane et al., 2007), with several authors highlighting the
development of future leadership capacity as a key benefit (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Goldring et al.,
2021; Hargreaves & Fink, 2012; Syed, 2015). Consistent throughout the data was a recognition
of such models at AIS, with the importance of building and nurturing strong leadership teams a
common thread across all interviews. Senior school leaders prioritized the ability to develop and
lead teams within their recruitment and team design processes, but also highlighted the
advantage of a strong team culture in attracting talented leadership to AIS.
There was evidence that in designing teams, consideration was given to both the needs of
the team, and the strategic needs of the institution. In the case of the recently hired high school
principal, the majority of participants highlighted her capacity as an instructional leader, together
with her vast experience as both a principal and principal supervisor, as a key factors in her
recruitment. The loss of institutional memory from departing leaders in this division was also
highlighted as a crucial design factor, which might explain the decision to hire two internal
candidates for the assistant principal positions that were also open in the high school. Similar
considerations were discussed in reference to design of the new middle school leadership team
that will be in place at the start of the next school year.
Strategic Portfolio Design
Recent research from Goldring et al. (2021) argues that the assistant principal role should
be redesigned with a greater emphasis on instructional leadership in preparation for the
principalship, and that principals should be more intentional about designing portfolios to align
with this purpose. There was strong evidence to suggest that the role of the assistant principal
had evolved to become more instructionally oriented, but whether portfolios were designed with
principal preparation as a focus was unclear. The level of input from senior school leaders in
128

designing the portfolios of the assistant principals was also unclear. The researcher felt this could
be an opportunity for a greater degree of intentional leadership capacity building.
There did appear to be high degrees of autonomy for both principals and assistant
principals to design the teams that they led, which also included the recruitment of team
members where necessary. Several participants noted that it was unusual in international school
circles for assistant principals to assume this level of responsibility, providing some evidence
that the role of assistant principal at AIS was evolving to better align with principal preparation.
However, members of the middle school team explained that despite being together for several
years, their portfolios had not changed significantly, suggesting there was room for greater
intentionality in aligning to principal preparation. All assistant principals that were interviewed
reported that instructional leadership and coaching were core components of their work.
However, perhaps due to some participants’ limited time in their roles at AIS, the extent to which
portfolios were designed with leadership capacity building as a focus was not clear.
Launching Strong Teams: Calibration and Institutional Coherence
Participants also reported that calibration was a huge proportion of how their time was
spent in their teams, particularly in the high school. It is worth noting that members of this team
had served a combined total of three years as AIS administrators prior to this school year. In
contrast, the middle school team had been relatively stable over the past 7 years, though their
principal did explain it had taken them at least 3 years before they could begin to think about
building capacity beyond their immediate team. The stability of central leadership, particularly in
the role of principal supervisor was identified as a potential support in maintaining institutional
coherence, though it was also acknowledged that this was not particularly replicable. It was not
clear whether a comprehensive succession plan was in place in this instance.
129

Collaborative Leadership Approaches
One of the most dominant themes to emerge across all interviews was the perspective that
AIS was a highly collaborative organization. Participants noted a range of distributive leadership
structures in support of this view, with multiple references to empowering teacher leaders, but
they also spoke to a collaborative approach to decision making within their immediate teams.
However, several participants also explained that there were times when workload and workflow
constrained such approaches, with the urgent superseding the important. There did appear to be
divisional differences in the level of collaboration, with the high school team reporting less
collaboration, perhaps due to a lack of overlap in work portfolios.
Developing Future School Leaders
Failing to plan for a change in leadership is one of the most common sources for derailing
school improvement efforts (Hargreaves & Fink, 2004; Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Lee,
2015; Leithwood et al, 2008). Most leading organizations prioritize leadership development and
succession planning as key improvement processes (Bierly & Shy, 2013), yet it is rare for school
systems to accurately anticipate their next leadership vacancy, and rarer still to have a qualified
internal candidate ready to assume the role (Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). At AIS, the role
of the assistant principal was viewed by the majority of senior school leaders as being
fundamental to sustaining school leadership and a key piece in the succession planning puzzle.
There was also recognition that AIS needed to be thoughtful about its leadership pipeline and
equip its assistant principals with a set of experiences to ensure they were ready should a
principal succession situation arise. While the division principals were identified as crucial in
building a succession plan and supporting the growth of their assistant principals, there was
strong evidence that senior leaders themselves were now making investments with this end in
130

mind, with several participants highlighting the benefits of coaching and instructional
walkthroughs with the superintendent.
Steppingstone Roles and the Pathway to the Principalship
Almost every participant highlighted the middle school as an example of succession
planning at AIS, with the role of middle school instructional coach identified as an excellent
steppingstone role into administration. Next year, two of the four members of the middle school
administration team will have been promoted internally from this role. Participants from this
division attributed this to the fact that the role had been reconceived in service of the strategic
plan, providing coaches the opportunity to facilitate learning for larger teams of adults, requiring
them to develop a wider systems view as they consider change management, while working
closely alongside the administration team. As the one administrator put it “if anybody in the
school has the clearest vision of what the mental model of our future looks like, outside of this
administrative office, it’s those three coaches.''
Cieminski (2018) highlights the importance of building internal leadership capacity to
combat the challenges of an unplanned succession event. The current middle school principal
announced her resignation just prior to the first interview in this study, with the appointment of a
current assistant principal to the role occurring soon after. Most participants again attributed this
to quality succession planning within the division, though there were some concerns that
succession planning was not yet a formal process at AIS. In the high school division, the
pathway to administration was more varied, and there did not appear to be clear and obvious
teacher leader positions that explicitly prepared candidates to step into the assistant principal
role. This assertion is supported by the fact that those making the step from middle school coach
to assistant principal reported minimal variation in their expectations of the role in comparison to
131

their current lived experience. For those making the step in the high school, there appeared to be
a much greater disparity, an observation that will be discussed later in this chapter.
Talent Identification: Talent Mapping and Tapping
Bierly and Shy (2013) suggest that school leaders should be evaluated on their “ability to
identify and strategically place outstanding talent in key roles” (p. 42). While there was evidence
that AIS was beginning to be more systematic in how it identified potential future leaders, with
talent mapping exercises referenced by the majority of participants, the level of intentionality in
designing and implementing leadership development plans was unclear. Several participants did
point to a host of distributive leadership structures, the PLC Coach model, and a number of
specialist and teacher leader roles as examples of a commitment to developing future school
leaders, but it was not clear whether support for these roles was intentionally oriented towards
developing future leadership capacity. Many participants also recognized the impact of tapping,
either on their own career paths, or those of the people they had supported. However, the extent
to which this tapping was matched with mentorship and support was inconsistent.
The Principal as a Mentor to Future School Leaders
Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms (2011) explain that mentorship must be reconceived as truly
indispensable from leadership development, while Daresh (2004) argues that a commitment to
mentoring current and aspiring leaders signals a culture of developmental support that and can
help to reframe the early stages of the principalship beyond just mere survival. The principal as a
mentor to future school leaders was a dominant theme across all participants. Senior school
leaders explained the development of the assistant principals was a common feature of their
discussions with the division principals. However, it was not clear to what extent this was
formalized as part of their job descriptions and appraisal processes.
132

The divisional principals that were interviewed did report prioritizing leadership
development and succession planning, though in reference to the school one shared “I don’t
think we necessarily lead with saying that this is a priority.” Another spoke to their work
mentoring a cohort of aspiring leaders at AIS and explained that their executive coach had been
the push to move that work forward. There was also inconsistency as to the form that mentoring
should take. In some instances, participants took a longer-term view recognizing that the
investment would eventually pay off. In other instances, there was an acknowledgement that to
do this work well, the principal has to be able to resource it with the time it needs and that this is
context dependent. This dispersed set of perspectives suggest that there is not yet a collective
understanding as to the role of mentorship at AIS. However, one emerging and valued support
was the fact that every administrator and school leader now works with an executive leadership
coach. The majority of participants reported positive experiences with their respective coaches,
which can lead to an increased likelihood of coaching and mentoring aspiring leaders (Crow,
2006; Parylo et al., 2012).
Managing Leadership Succession at AIS
According to Hargreaves (2005), “principals stand on the shoulders of those who went
before them and lay the foundation for those who will follow” (p. 163). Managing the process of
principal succession speaks to the level of organizational involvement in positioning the new
leader to be successful, with unplanned principal succession having the potential to significantly
undermine school improvement efforts (Fink & Brayman, 2004; Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006;
Lee, 2015). In the majority of instances across that past decade, AIS had run a search process to
manage its leadership succession events. However, prior to the first interview for this study, an
assistant principal was internally promoted soon after their middle school principal had resigned.
133

Participants shared wide ranging views on this topic, with both the timing of the resignation, and
the current pandemic context significant factors.
Deciding to Appoint a Successor or Run a Process
Most senior school leaders agreed that a quick decision had been necessary given that this
was a year in which the school had seen a remarkably high number of resignations, something
they attributed to the current pandemic. The challenge of running a principal search in October
had already been experienced twice in the past 4 years in the high school. There were concerns
that such uncertainty would not only constrain the current recruitment season, it might also result
in further resignations. There was also a worry that any process might have the appearance of
lacking integrity given the quality of the internal candidate. In fact, when discussing the
appointment with the departing principal, one senior school leader had shared “you know, in any
other industry, if your deputy wasn't ready to step into your shoes, you would be considered a
failure.” This aligns with the assertion from Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms (2011) that schools
should have at least two internal candidates ready and waiting for each leadership position.
Participants also highlighted the reality that with both the principal and another assistant
principal departing next year, there would be a significant loss of institutional memory. Had the
internal candidate not assumed the role, it was possible they would have departed the following
year, which might have further complicated work around the current campus upgrade. In
addition to supporting the continuity of that work, some participants also viewed the appointment
as a means of affirming the current direction of the school, suggesting this succession event
might be classified as an unplanned continuity, borrowing the classifications presented by
Hargreaves et al. (2003).
134

However, there were participants who felt that “a more transparent path” with a greater
degree of stakeholder input should have been explored. There were similar concerns regarding
consistency with past practice and the dangers in setting a precedent, specifically the implicit
message that would be sent to any internal candidate that is pushed into a search process in the
future. Regardless of how comprehensive any search process at AIS was, there was recognition
that imperfections are always a possibility, and that knowing a candidate and having first-hand
experience of their strengths and practice places them at significant advantage.
The Typical Leadership Recruitment Process
Aligned with the school’s collaborative approach to leadership and decision making,
participants report that the typical search process is designed with high degrees of stakeholder
representation and input. For principal searches, AIS will usually collaborate with a recruitment
consultant to expand the pool of high-quality applicants and support in the screening process. In
the same way that job descriptions have evolved with a greater emphasis on instructional
leadership, participants report that the recruitment process has experienced a similar shift with
the recent introduction of instructional coaching performance tasks. Reference checks are
conducted twice, with the hiring leader required to video conference with a candidate’s past and
current supervisor to ensure that the nuances of the conversation align with their initial form
submission. Normore (2004) explains that no induction process can adequately repair a flawed
recruitment process, and there was significant evidence to suggest that the typical leadership
search process was a rigorous and highly collaborative endeavor that was aligned to the school’s
emerging leadership priorities.

135

New Leader Socialization Supports
How new principals are socialized into organizations impacts the organization's ability to
attract and retain high potential candidates (Barnett & Shoho, 2017). These effects on principal
retention, coupled with the growing complexity of the role, suggest that the issue of principal
socialization should not be left to chance (Bengston et al., 2013). Preserving the legacies of past
principals, understanding the capacities they have developed and how they may be built upon,
requires a deliberate process that facilitates the exchange of knowledge so that new leaders are
positioned for success (Hargreaves, 2005). There was significant evidence to suggest that senior
school leaders were highly invested in supporting leadership transitions through a variety of
socialization approaches. However, all participants highlighted the challenges of the current
pandemic in constraining a preferred approach to this work.
The inability to conduct a site visit prior to new leaders formally commencing their role
due to travel restrictions, and the required quarantine upon arrival in the host country were
identified as significant disruptions. Adhering to the host country’s ongoing social distancing
regulations continued to increase school leaders’ workload, requiring significant adjustments to
the day-to-day operations of the school. As one recently appointed principal put it “I’ve never
been able to stand in front of the faculty.” The inability to conduct large scale in person meetings
further highlighting the unique challenges the pandemic had required them to navigate.
The majority of participants agreed there was a need for a differentiated approach for new
leader socialization that recognized both the current organizational context and the needs of the
leaders involved. While there was evidence of a variety of approaches in how new leaders were
supported as they entered their new roles, the level of intentionality appeared to be inconsistent.
As an example, one recently appointed assistant principal from the middle school had identified
136

managing student discipline cases as an area for development. In the months prior to
commencing the role they had sought support from their principal who provided an opportunity
for some explicit practice and preparation as they observed how a case was managed. They then
drafted the various communications as it was resolved. However, this was not the case in the
high school, with one participant observing that there is a relatively large transition window for
an internal candidate and that they would have benefited from the opportunity to observe and
experience some of those complex and nuanced discipline cases before the first one landed on
their desk.
Most participants highlighted this window of transition for internally promoted
candidates as a major benefit, particularly in situations when there is a perceived loss of
institutional memory. While consideration of this outbound knowledge can happen through
leadership distribution models, a large window of transition does provide opportunities for the
grooming of successors (Hargreaves, 2005; Fullan, 2002). However, from the perspective of
internally promoted school leaders, the data suggest that this longer window of transition was not
always leveraged optimally with some wondering whether there could have been better support
and preparation for some of the role specific aspects of their work.
The internally promoted candidate’s familiarity with school context naturally requires a
less intensive approach to organizational socialization, but these participants were also better
positioned to access the various support structures. In the middle school, this seemed especially
true given that the role of instructional coach had been integrated into much of the leadership
work in that division. There is also a greater opportunity to influence some of the decision
making that can consequently position the new leader for success. One participant shared that
their team had discussed some of the opportunities of the transitions in terms of the decisions that
137

the outgoing principal can make that will not be a political hit for the internally promoted
principal next year.
One support that was consistent for all recently appointed school leaders was access to an
executive coach, a resource that was unanimously appreciated by all participants. Similarly,
instructional walkthroughs with the superintendent and direct supervisor one-to-one support
meetings were also highly valued. One senior school leader responsible for directly supervising
the divisional principals did explain “I'm thinking about when I leave the organization, how do I
do it at a moment of time where there's stability in the school leadership, so that my transition
isn't upsetting.” The historical stability in this position had been heralded as a huge benefit in
terms of institutional coherence. However, given the absence of a formalized succession
planning process, the researcher did wonder whether there was an inherent vulnerability in the
support system for principals as AIS.
New Leader Perceptions of Their Transition
From the moment their tenure begins, school leaders are confronted with the
responsibilities and challenges of veterans (Bengston et al., 2013; Crow; 2006), with this lack of
a mediated entry causing stress and potential burnout (Crow, 2006). Parkay et al. (1992) explain
that poorly managed socialization can lead to principals abandoning their belief in their capacity
to initiate change, while Bengston et al. (2013) also highlight the harmful effects on self-efficacy
and retention. In reflecting on their transitions, new leaders generally reported a gap in their
expectations of the role in comparison to reality, while challenges related to workload and
priorities were also common. Factors related to navigating the internal promotion were also
prevalent.

138

Contrasting Expectations With the Reality of the Role
While all participants reported the reality of the role differing from their expectations, the
areas of focus were wide ranging, as was the degree of difference. One experienced principal
explained “every time I've been a new principal, you're never prepared.” Those promoted
internally at the high school division discussed the scale of decision making and the complexity
of the work around relationships, as some of the biggest differences. In their prior roles they had
felt high degrees of confidence in their ability to anticipate and react to the majority of
challenges that presented themselves. The complexity of problem solving was now much greater
as they had to consider the implications for the wider system.
In contrast, a participant from the middle school explained that the experience had
matched their expectations, as they noted a level of alignment with their past role in terms of
coaching and adult facilitation. They also explained “I don't know that there's any other structure
that I would have needed because I've been a part of so much of the work already.” In reference
to their principal, they explained that they had felt like they were being prepared long before they
had even moved into coaching. This sentiment aligns with research that argues how early
identification of talent is crucial as it provides principals with greater scope to design the
individualized support plans and mentorship aspiring leaders need (Bierly & Shy, 2013;
Hargreaves et al., 2003; Parfitt, 2017).
For those participants entering the organization from other schools, there was a feeling
that a more accurate picture of the reality they were entering could have been presented. The
number of school wide and divisional priorities, particularly during the peak of a pandemic, was
highlighted as a concern, as was the proportion of a typical administrator’s day that was
scheduled for meetings. These were not uncommon according to one senior school leader who
139

highlighted work-life balance and initiative overload as significant faculty retention opportunities
for AIS. An inaccurate assessment of the volume of change leadership in relation to shifting
instructional practice was also an area that surfaced.
Establishing Priorities and Workload Considerations
The majority of recently appointed principals and assistant principals spoke to the
difficulty in managing workload with one noting “unequivocally the asset that we struggle the
most with is time” and that the allocation of time is not always aligned to the most important
work. The challenge in establishing priorities was also a concern that was raised by most, but
especially prevalent for those participants that were new to the role of assistant principal in the
high school. While all appreciated just how much they were learning, the idea that when you are
new, everything is important was a common theme, and more support in establishing areas of
focus would have been valued. The experienced principal hired to lead that team also felt similar,
and given the additional context of the pandemic, the researcher wondered if there was an
opportunity for higher degrees of intervention from the supporting senior leadership.
Several participants spoke of the challenge of launching the school year, with the balance
of time spent in the division, versus time spent with working on the broader strategic institutional
goals a concern. Looking ahead to the next school year, there was consensus that this needed to
be re-examined, especially given the number of new faculty that will be transitioning to the
school. Some participants also felt a more strategic approach to portfolio design was necessary,
with the perception that the current curriculum reviews processes, implementation of
recommendations from past reviews, and the campus upgrade work would sometimes coalesce in
an inequitable distribution of work. Prior to formally commencing their roles, participants also
highlighted the magnitude of work in the pre-arrival phase of transition as feeling like they were
140

operating two jobs at once. However, no obvious alternative was presented in the data, with
many participants also eager for more support and opportunities to learn during this phase.
Navigating the Internal Promotion
The majority of participants highlighted a variety of benefits to promoting internally,
with many oriented around a much longer window in which to engage in organizational and
professional socialization. While most spoke to the period of time between being offered the job
and formally commencing the role, there was also recognition for intentionally designed
leadership development roles that further extended the window of transition into school
leadership. While some participants felt promoting internally was sometimes a missed
opportunity to import new ideas, others pushed back explaining that often internally promoted
leaders haven’t always had the platforms to push forward their agendas, a perspective that aligns
with Bowler’s (2007) assertion that organizations should look to develop leaders from within the
organization that are capable of introducing new perspectives.
There was also recognition across interviews of the importance of social capital, with
most participants discussing an advantage for internal candidates is the opportunity to build trust
and credibility in their prior teacher leader roles. How they continue to replenish those social
capital reserves in their new roles, particularly in a transient international school community was
a wonder surfaced by one participant. An awareness of the absence of that social capital was also
noted by another externally hired school leader, who had discussed the need for increased levels
of awareness as they entered the organization. How senior school leaders support their new
divisional administrators in building and continuing to leverage relationships with the teams they
lead, particularly in these pandemic times, was viewed as an important area for further reflection.

141

Further Challenges in Transition
The challenges posed by the pandemic continued to be a disruption, even for participants
who were into their second year in the role. The amount of faculty turnover, something that the
majority of participants attributed to the pandemic, has resulted in a more substantial recruitment
season, with the subsequent onboarding of faculty an anticipated load heading into next year.
Some participants also reported an inability to play to their perceived strengths, in some cases
this was seen as a function of the pandemic, with local social distancing regulations constraining
opportunities for those relational skill sets to flourish. In others, it was a case of how their work
portfolios had been designed, suggesting an opportunity to better align divisional leaders’ work
experiences with their perceived strengths, while still supporting their continued growth. This
was certainly the case in the middle school, with one participant highlighting the coaching
components of her new role as an area that brought them joy. Finally, all participants reflected
positively on their transition, and while they recognized the unique challenges posed by the
pandemic, all recently appointed principals and assistant principals were optimistic about the
future and highly appreciative of the support they had received.
Study Limitations
This study was designed to explore how a P–12 school, identified as The American
International School (AIS) for this study, plans for, manages, and supports principal and assistant
principal successions and to understand how recently appointed principals and assistant
principals experience their transition into their new roles. Consequently, it may not be possible to
apply the conclusions drawn from this study to other school settings. The study also relied on
interview data alone and was not informed by other qualitative approaches such as document
analysis or participant observations. As a result, the ability to triangulate the findings upon which
142

the conclusions were drawn was limited (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As a
qualitative study in which the researcher was the primary instrument, the presentation of the
information shared is a function of the interpretations of the interviewer (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016; Patton 2014). Similarly, the notion of reactivity cannot be discounted and as Maxwell
(2013) explains, what is said in the interview is “always influenced by the interviewer and the
interview situation” (p. 125). The researcher’s role as a teacher leader at AIS may have also
introduced some unintended bias due to the researcher’s interest in ways in which AIS can
support the growth and leadership development of its teacher leaders.
Implications for Practice
With widespread acknowledgement for the impact of principal effects on student
outcomes (Grissom et al., 2021), and the continued acceleration of principal turnover, a steady
supply of high-quality principal leadership is necessary to sustain school improvement efforts
(Bierly & Shy, 2013; Hargreaves & Fink, 2004; Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006; Lee, 2015;
Leithwood et al, 2008). While much has been written about how organizations assess and
respond to their present and future leadership needs through the process of succession planning
and management (Hargreaves et al., 2003; Peters-Hawkins et al., 2018; Rothwell, 2010;
Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011), there has been limited research within the international school
context. As a result, the findings and recommendations proposed in this study may be useful for
other schools wishing to understand more about the process of succession planning and
management at a high performing American international school.
Similarly, how principals are socialized into their new roles has also been well
documented throughout the literature (Barnett & Shoho, 2017; Bengston et al., 2013; Crow,
2006; Hart 1993; Parkay et al., 1992), but again, there is little known about the socialization and
143

supports that facilitate successful principalships in an international school context. The findings
and recommendations from this study may also be of interest to school leaders wishing to better
support the process of school leader socialization within an international school context.
Recommendations that emerged from the key themes in this study are shared in the following
section.
Recommendations
The next section outlines the recommendations that surfaced as a result of this study.
Where appropriate, connections have been drawn to the literature shared in Chapter 2.
A Continued Commitment to Coaching
Bloom et al. (2003) choose to make a distinction between mentors and coaches, defining
mentors as organizational insiders in job-alike positions, whereas the most effective coaches they
consider to be outsiders who have professional coaching as their primary work. The majority of
participants in this study did not make this distinction, but all saw coaching as a regular feature
of their work, with most seeing significant value in coaching as a leadership support regardless
of whether these coaching conversations took place with a colleague or an outside expert.
Coaching is now viewed as a core component of the role of both principals and the assistant
principals at AIS, and a critical skillset for advancing conversations around high quality
instruction while supporting a culture of growth and feedback. The recently appointed principals
and assistant principals that had a greater depth of coaching experience reported a more positive
transition, while their expectations of their roles were more accurately aligned to the reality.
Those participants without a formal coaching background also recognized the benefits of
coaching as a framework for facilitating learning, entering conversations with an inquiry stance,
and expanding their capacity to support teams that operated in domains beyond their perceived
144

areas of expertise. In reference to the PLC Coaching model that is currently being rolled out,
many participants noted the ancillary benefit of developing leadership capacity, further
emphasizing coaching as integral to the role of school leaders at AIS. Finally, the role of middle
school instructional coach was seen by many participants as a fertile ground for developing
future school leaders, as evidenced by the fact that two of the assistant principals in that division
next year will have been internally promoted from that role.
These factors combined led the researcher to conclude that AIS has accurately assessed
the significance of coaching in relation to developing and supporting school leaders, and more
broadly, in furthering a culture of growth and feedback. It should therefore continue with its
processes that demonstrate an institutional commitment to coaching. The investment in an
executive coach for each school leader is one example that has not only been a vital support for
the majority of participants in this study, it has also been a mechanism that has encouraged
school leaders at AIS to more actively develop leadership capacity in others, as evidenced by the
current middle school principal’s decision to mentor a group of aspiring female leaders at AIS.
Studies consistently show that aspiring principals view both informal and formal mentoring as
valuable to their future development, with the best mentors being successful current and former
principals (Aravena, 2020; Cieminski, 2018; Goldring et al., 2021; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms,
2011). The expansion of the PLC Coaching model is a further commitment, and while
developing school leaders is not its primary focus, there is also an opportunity to further
understand why the role of instructional coach in the middle school has proved to be a successful
pathway into school leadership, yet the equivalent role in the high school has not. Understanding
these differences may help to position the PLC Coach role as another viable pathway into school
leadership.
145

Investing in the Assistant Principals
Crow (2006) suggests that redefining the role of the assistant principal as principal
preparation can positively impact the socialization stage at which candidates arrive at the
principalship, particularly those that are promoted from within the same school. Similarly,
Goldring et al. (2021) argue that the assistant principal role should be redesigned with a strong
emphasis on instructional leadership in preparation for the principalship, calling on school
leaders to be intentional in designing work portfolios to align with this purpose. Senior school
leaders interviewed in this study explained that the role of assistant principal at AIS had evolved
to have more of an instructional leadership focus, with instructional coaching through
observation and feedback an emerging emphasis in their work.
While all assistant principals appreciated individualized leadership development support
from their principals, there were some divisional differences, with candidates in the middle
school able to draw upon a broader base of examples. The researcher attributed this to the lack of
leadership turnover within that team and the relatively limited timeframe that the high school
assistant principals had experienced with their current principal. To mitigate these potential
differences in the future, AIS should continue to expand the leadership development
responsibilities for the assistant principals beyond just the divisional principal. There was strong
evidence that the superintendent was already making an intentional effort to invest in the
leadership capacity of the assistant principals, with instructional walkthroughs and coaching the
mechanisms most often referenced. However, there was inconclusive evidence regarding the
level of involvement of senior school leaders in designing work portfolios and developing a set
of sequential leadership tasks that support principal preparation.
146

Beyond developing future leadership potential, Goldring et al. (2021) argue that investing
in the capacity of the assistant principals can help to reduce both teacher and principal attrition,
through their contributions to school climate, leadership, and hence the working conditions for
both teachers and principals. Multiple participants referenced a strong, collaborative team culture
at AIS, with some also noting the advantage of strong teams in attracting and retaining leadership
talent. A commitment to models of distributive leadership was also a theme that emerged from
this study, and with assistant principals identified as key instructional leaders at AIS, an
investment in their leadership is also an investment in the capacity building efforts for their
successors, further sharpening the origin of the leadership pipeline at AIS.
Formalize the Succession Planning Process
Although the middle school division was identified by most participants as an exemplar
of succession planning at AIS, there was also acknowledgement that this was not a formalized
process. While the majority of participants indicated a desire to think about a more intentional
approach to developing a leadership pipeline, there was recognition that this was only happening
within pockets across the school. In the case of the middle school example, participants
attributed this success to the work of the middle school principal and their immediate team,
rather than the work of the broader institution. With their intentional design of the instructional
coaching role, this team did appear to know the facets of leadership that were markers for
success beyond the next promotion (Rothwell, 2010; Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011), with
coaching, adult facilitation, a wider systems perspective and implementation at scale all
identified. However, this did not appear to be the case in the high school, with the pathway to the
principalship also less obvious in this division.
147

Although talent mapping was an emerging practice that was discussed by the majority of
participants, it was not clear what data was used to inform the process or whether it was aligned
to a specific set of standards for leadership. Once the talent had been mapped, the extent to
which intentional development plans or strategic stretch assignments were utilized was also
inconclusive. Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms (2011) advocate for this work to be led from the very
top, with district superintendents actively involved in a screening process that matches internal
talent with appropriate stretch assignments. They also call for school leaders to be evaluated on
their ability to strategically place talent in positions of higher leverage. While senior school
leaders did outline the importance of developing a team and developing succession plans,
participants did not report that developing leadership capacity in others was an explicit part of
their job description.
In light of these findings, the researcher recommends that AIS take steps to formalize its
approach to succession planning. This process begins with clearly articulated standards for
leadership that include actively developing the capacity of others. They should then be
appropriately moderated to match with their position along the pathway to the principalship
(Schmidt-Davis & Bottoms, 2011). These standards can also drive the systems for equitable
talent identification and development. This leadership development process should be supported
through the provision of development plans that help map out a multistep journey that
intentionally develops the required skills and competencies through appropriate leadership
experiences (Bierly & Shy, 2013). It is recommended that AIS reflect on its standards for
leadership and examine whether they are driving an effective approach to succession planning.
This should include an assessment of the level of alignment between leadership standards and
their systems for talent identification and development, a subset of which should be leadership
148

development through purposefully designed roles and placements. Schmidt-Davis and Bottoms
(2011) advocate for schools to have at least two internal candidates ready and waiting for each
leadership position within the organization, and AIS should aspire to formalize a succession
planning process with this end in mind.
Purposefully Designed Steppingstone Roles Beyond the Assistant Principal
Cieminski (2018) highlights the importance of building internal leadership capacity to
combat the challenges of an unexpected event. Given the context of a global pandemic this
assertion certainly resonates with many participants attributing the recent increase in faculty
turnover to this factor. Over the past 2 school years, both the middle and high school divisions
have each had a departing principal and assistant principal, with each division also internally
promoting two candidates to the role of assistant principal from teacher leader positions. The
pandemic has also significantly altered the day to day demands of school leaders, with multiple
participants noting its direct effect on workload and working conditions. Hargreaves (2005)
explains that it is often the very shackles of crisis management that inhibit schools’ ability to
properly plan for their future leadership needs, but as AIS transitions to its post pandemic future
there is a pressing need to replenish its leadership pipeline beyond the assistant principal
position.
There was evidence throughout this study that AIS was committed to models of
distributive leadership and that these models offered the greatest value when they facilitated the
development of future leadership capacity within the organization (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Goldring
et al., 2021; Hargreaves & Fink, 2012; Syed, 2015). Multiple steppingstone roles beyond the
assistant principal were also referenced, though the extent to which these roles were intentionally
designed and supported with leadership development as a core focus appeared to be inconsistent.
149

In the middle school division, it was clear that a direct investment had been made in their
instructional coaches, both in terms of how the role was designed, and the ongoing mentorship
support that was provided. However, participants in the high school had made the transition from
the role of department chairperson and tended to report greater disparity between their
expectations of the role and its reality. The scale of the decision making and the need to adopt a
larger systems view were the most prominent differences. Participants in the middle school did
report mentoring as a support for teacher leaders, which can help bridge the gap between the
narrow focus of the current role and the leadership skills required at the next level (Barnett &
Shoho, 2017; Liang & Augustine-Shaw, 2016; Goldring et al., 2021).
In light of this evidence, it is recommended that AIS continue to invest in purposefully
designed steppingstone roles that develop the skills and competencies necessary to move along
the pathway to the principalship. Examples of these roles include the instructional coaches, PLC
coaches, department chairpersons, as well as the emerging specialist roles that have been created
to implement broader strategic initiatives at the divisional levels. In some instances, these roles
may need to be redesigned so that the leadership development experiences they facilitate align
with the school’s standards for leadership. In situations where this alignment is less feasible, the
use of targeted stretch assignments should be leveraged. Lastly, AIS should consider the role that
mentors and coaches can play to ensure a level of focus on leadership development. Participants
in this study regularly referenced one-to-one check-ins with their direct supervisor as a valued
support, but the focus was not always oriented to developing future leadership capacity.
Optimize the Transition Window for Internally Promoted Candidates
Principals that had previously served as assistant principals in the same school report that
their familiarity with context and their existing relationships enabled them to quickly implement
150

their vision for the school (Caruso, 2013; Lee, 2015). However, Buckman et al. (2018) explain
those promoted internally will still require socialization and a period of acclimatization,
especially when prior roles have not intentionally built future leadership capacity. Although the
majority of participants in this study identified the longer window of transition as a significant
advantage in terms of socializing the internally promoted school leader, many also agreed that
there were opportunities for AIS to further optimize this process.
For those participants making the transition to assistant principal for the first time, the
greatest opportunities tended to be in the areas of professional socialization, which is the process
of acquiring the knowledge, skills and dispositions necessary to enact a professional role
regardless of setting (Crow, 2006; Normore, 2004; Parkay et al., 1992). Participants from both
divisions had identified managing complex discipline cases as an area for development. In the
case of the middle school, they were able to observe and contribute to the resolution of a
substantial discipline case prior to their formal commencement of the role. However, this was not
the case in the high school, and in reflecting on their transition, one participant felt there was a
significant opportunity to have a window into some of the more role specific aspects of their
work.
Moving forward, it is recommended that AIS promote cross-divisional collaboration in
identifying some preferred practices for supporting the transition of internally promoted
candidates. Specific attention should be given to professional socialization and the role specific
aspects of the work. Learning during this transition window should be facilitated by a
development plan that might include mini-internships, job shadowing, and case studies. As the
school moves towards more intentional approaches to developing a leadership pipeline,
supported by a continuum view of leadership that is aligned to leadership standards, there will
151

also be opportunities to better leverage its current structures for distributing leadership, and thus
further extend the window for developing the internal candidate. Extending the development
timeframe also creates further space for leveraging opportunities such as the school’s doctoral
program with the University of Southern California.
Accurately Assessing the Entry Point of New Leaders
Failure to properly manage the process of leadership succession, being mindful of the
political, historical, and longitudinal aspects of change, can severely undermine school
improvement efforts (Hargreaves & Goodson, 2006), with years of progress potentially erased in
the process (Lee, 2015). Recognizing the entry point for the new leader is critical if the process is
to be supported through the productive exchange of outbound and inbound leadership knowledge
(Hargreaves et al. 2003; Lee 2015). Participants in this study report a variety of mechanisms that
were used to help them in assessing their entry point into their new roles, with the hiring process,
the virtual visit, and regular touch points with their future team members and supervisors the
most frequently surfaced examples. However, in most cases, the disparity between the
expectations of the role and the reality was significant. Barnett and Shoho (2017) highlight the
disconnect between new principal expectations and lived reality as a key challenge to the
socialization process, suggesting that this gap is not uncommon. Nonetheless, findings point to
an opportunity for AIS to improve its socialization process for new leaders by supporting a more
accurate assessment of their entry point into their new roles.
It is recommended that senior school leaders play a more active role in capturing and
sharing the current reality that new leaders will be entering into. This is especially important for
new leadership teams that have experienced a significant loss in institutional memory as well as
teams that will require a high degree of socialization, be that professional or organizational. In
152

the high school division, an inaccurate assessment of the level of change leadership that would
be necessary was a recurring theme, and while the pandemic was certainly a related factor, there
was still a sense that the onus of assessment was placed on the new leader, when perhaps a more
intentional and directive approach would have been helpful. Bengston et al (2013) consider
induction processes to be systemic and planned approaches used to control the process of
organizational socialization, explaining that a successful implementation of an induction process
often involves mentoring and is dependent upon knowledge of organizational socialization
theory. While the transition process at AIS valued high degrees of input and autonomy for its
new leaders, these new leaders experienced a challenge in establishing priorities. Related
recommendations are discussed next.
Support in Establishing Priorities
The majority of recently appointed school leaders spoke to the challenge in establishing
priorities throughout their transition to their new roles. Prior to commencing their work at AIS,
the tension of managing two jobs at once was felt by the majority of participants, though this was
more pronounced for those candidates that were hired externally. Most participants reflected that
they would have appreciated additional support in establishing areas of focus at this stage, with
many reporting some self-initiated areas of preservice preparation. As they formally commenced
their roles, several participants discussed a desire to launch the school year with a greater
proportion of time dedicated to the work within the division, suggesting that too much time was
oriented towards the broader intuitional work of the strategic plan. Given that so many
participants also noted the school’s emphasis on collaborative leadership approaches, and the
importance of launching strong teams, the call for this redistribution of time is perhaps not a
surprise, particularly since the majority of new leaders that were interviewed had been internally
153

promoted from teacher leader positions. In positioning new leaders for success, several authors
have expressed the need for an induction process that acknowledges the fragile nature of
socialization and provides space for the divesting of old professional identities in preparation for
new ones (Bengston et al., 2013; Crow, 2006; Hart, 1993). One of the advantages of the
internally promoted candidate is the social capital and credibility they have previously accrued in
their teacher leader positions. The data suggests there is an opportunity for senior school leaders
to reflect on how they structure the start of the school year so that this advantage is maintained
and leveraged effectively.
While internally promoted candidates will need time to renegotiate their relationships, for
those hired externally it is critical they make time to establish them. In reference to one recently
appointed principal, a senior school leader described how the focus of the transition had been to
ensure that this new leader landed really well relationally with their faculty. As this new leader
reflected on their transition, they saw their relationships with the faculty as an ongoing area for
growth. While they did attribute this to local social distancing measures constraining their ability
to lead publicly, the researcher wondered whether more could have been done by the institution
to support this new leader in prioritizing the relational aspects of their work. This kind of focus
can help to accelerate the movement to full participation on the insider trajectory which can
facilitate greater leadership distribution and subsequently foster an improved exchange of
outbound knowledge in the future (Fink & Brayman, 2004).
Participants also referenced ongoing challenges in managing workload, establishing
priorities, and the sense of isolation that can come with the transition into school administration.
From an organizational socialization perspective, mentoring is seen as a powerful support that
can help to mitigate against the feeling of professional isolation, issues in managing workload
154

and priorities, while also helping to maintain a focus on instructional leadership (Barnett &
Shoho, 2017; Lee, 2015; Parylo et al., 2012). While all participants had access to an external
coach and the support of their direct supervisor, the supervisor was not always perceived as a
mentor. From a participant perspective, access to mentors in job-like positions was limited, with
participants reporting that one principal was currently mentoring a cohort of aspiring female
leaders. Parylo et al. (2012) outline the value of mentorship in terms of principal sustainability
and job satisfaction and advocate for a shift in principal job description language that encourages
experienced principals to mentor others. Incidentally, the principal that was mentoring the cohort
of aspiring leaders will be departing AIS at the end of this school year.
In consideration of these factors, it is recommended that senior school leaders at AIS
examine ways in which they can support new divisional administrators in establishing priorities
across the various stages of their transition. To support divisional leadership teams in launching
well, AIS should explore ways in which the divisional leaders’ time in their respective divisions
may be prioritized, especially in light of the increased number of faculty that will need to be
guided through their own onboarding processes next year. One option might be to re-evaluate the
timing of some of the broader strategic work and consider holding those meetings and retreats
toward the end of the previous school year. In years when there are new externally hired school
leaders, this timing might diminish their possible contributions. However, the additional time for
current divisional leaders to unpack and support those outcomes and directives within their own
contexts, together with the increased time in the division at the start of the year, might outweigh
that loss. Similarly, a review of how divisional leaders are spending their time throughout the
year should be conducted. Time dedicated to the hiring process, the campus upgrade, and
curriculum reviews were the most common reasons for pulling leaders away from their divisions
155

during the school year. Recognizing that some of these factors are seasonal, temporary and
cyclical, an analysis should be conducted to establish the extent of the issue and whether a more
optimal situation could be arrived at with some strategic portfolio design.
Future Research
This study examined approaches to planning, managing and supporting principal and
assistant principal succession in a single school setting in Southeast Asia. A future area of
interest might be a study that explores the approaches to succession planning at other
international school settings. It may also be interesting to conduct a similar study within the same
school setting in a post pandemic climate. Drawing comparison with this study may help to
uncover the relative impact of the pandemic while also spotlighting how the school’s approach to
managing leadership transitions has evolved as a result of its pandemic experiences. A future
study might also be conducted with the same participants to uncover the extent to which new
leader perceptions evolve throughout their transition. Hart (1993) suggests three stages that
emerge from the socialization stage theory literature: learning and uncertainty, gradual
adjustment, and stabilization. Bengston et al., (2013) suggest the first two stages provide the
most fertile ground for socialization tactics to take hold. Examining the perceptions of the same
participants at multiple points throughout their transition might help to optimize the socialization
approach deployed by senior school leaders at AIS.
Conclusions
There is now substantial evidence within the literature that an investment in selecting,
preparing, and supporting a high-quality principal workforce offers some of the highest returns
with respect to improving student outcomes (Bierly & Shy, 2013; Grissom et al, 2021;
Leithwood et al, 2004; Levin et al., 2020). The most innovative schools recognize that the
156

inevitability of leadership succession calls for an examination of the systems that develop and
sustain leadership from within their organizations (Fink & Brayman, 2004; Fullan, 2002;
Hargreaves & Fink, 2004; Peters, 2011; Peters-Hawkins et al., 2018). The potentially detrimental
effects of leadership succession, and the accelerating rates of leadership turnover, provide an
impetus for school systems to uncover more about the role of the organization in leadership
socialization so that new leaders are quickly positioned for success (Barnett & Shoho, 2017;
Bengston et al., 2013).
The purpose of this study was to explore how AIS plans for, manages, and supports
principal and assistant principal successions and to understand how recently appointed principals
and assistant principals experience their transition into their new roles. The findings from this
study showed that AIS was committed to developing its leadership capacity internally and that
this process was supported by a culture of growth and feedback. An organizational understanding
of the dimensions of effective principal leadership was beginning to emerge with instructional
leadership, coaching, and the ability to build and nurture highly collaborative teams the most
essential qualities.
The study also found that AIS was developing a more intentional approach to succession
planning, with the role of the assistant principal oriented and supported with principal
preparation as an emerging focus. A commitment to models of distributive leadership was also
evident. This was an effective support for the school’s leadership pipeline when steppingstone
roles were strategically designed to develop the facets of leadership necessary to succeed at the
next level. The role of the instructional coach in the middle school was identified as an exemplar.
Findings from the study suggest that intentionally designed steppingstone roles helped to extend
157

the window of professional and organizational socialization, resulting in a smoother transition
for these internally promoted school leaders.
For those leaders hired externally, the school used a variety of mechanisms to facilitate
the exchange of outbound and inbound leadership knowledge, though these were significantly
limited by the constraints of the current pandemic. The study also found that AIS affords a high
degree of autonomy and input to its newly appointed school leaders when designing transition
plans. Hargreaves (2005) explains that schools are too often preoccupied with inbound
leadership knowledge, and while participants appreciated the value AIS placed upon their input
and insight, the findings indicate that these leaders would have benefited from a greater level of
support in establishing priorities. For schools wishing to optimize their leadership transitions, a
careful assessment of the proposed entry point of the new leader is therefore critical in
developing a transition plan that facilitates an exchange of outbound and inbound leadership
knowledge that matches the intent of the succession and positions the new leader for success
(Fink & Brayman, 2004).

158

References
Abrams, L. S., & Gibbs, J. T. (2000). Planning for school change: School-community
collaboration in a full-service elementary school. Urban Education, 35(1), 79–103.
Anderson, L. M., & Turnbull, B. J. (2016). Evaluating and Supporting Principals. Building a
Stronger Principalship: V olume 4. Policy Studies Associates, Inc.
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/pages/building-a-stronger-
principalship-vol-4-evaluating-and-supporting-principals.aspx
Anderson, S., Leithwood, K., & Strauss, T. (2010). Leading data use in schools: Organizational
conditions and practices at the school and district levels. Leadership and Policy in
Schools, 9(3), 292–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700761003731492
Aravena, F. (2020). Principal succession in schools: A literature review (2003–
2019). Educational Management Administration &
Leadership. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220940331
Bacher-Hicks, A., Billings, S. B., & Deming, D. J. (2019). The school to prison pipeline: Long-
run impacts of school suspensions on adult crime (No. w26257). National Bureau of
Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w26257
Barnett, B. G., Shoho, A. R., & Okilwa, N. S. (2017). Assistant principals’ perceptions of
meaningful mentoring and professional development opportunities. International Journal of
Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 6(4), 285–301 .https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-02-
2017-0013
Bartanen, B. (2020). Principal quality and student attendance. Educational Researcher, 49(2),
101–113. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X19898702

159

Bartanen, B., Grissom, J. A., & Rogers, L. K. (2019). The impacts of principal
turnover. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 41(3), 350–374.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373719855044
Bengtson, E., Zepeda, S. J., & Parylo, O. (2013). School systems’ practices of controlling
socialization during principal succession: Looking through the lens of an organizational
socialization theory. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41(2), 143–
164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143212468344
Béteille, T., Kalogrides, D., & Loeb, S. (2012). Steppingstones: Principal career paths and school
outcomes. Social Science Research, 41(4), 904–919.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.03.003
Bierly, C., & Shy, E. (2013). Building pathways: How to develop the next generation of
transformational school leaders. Boston, MA: Bain and Company.
https://www.bain.com/contentassets/f5ee91c7d88f4c94932d9eb3dd126196/bain_report_buil
ding_pathways.pdf
Bloom, G., Castagna, C., & Warren, B. (2003). More than mentors: Principal
coaching. Leadership-Burlingame, 32(5), 20–23.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership.
John Wiley & Sons.
Branch, G. F., Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (2012). Estimating the effect of leaders on public
sector productivity: The case of school principals (No. w17803). National Bureau of
Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w17803
Branch, G. F., Hanushek, E. A., & Rivkin, S. G. (2013). School leaders matter. Education
Next, 13(1), 62–69. https://www.educationnext.org/school-leaders-matter/
160

Brown, K. M., & Wynn, S. R. (2007). Teacher retention issues: How some principals are
supporting and keeping new teachers. Journal of School Leadership, 17(6), 664–698.
https://doi.org/10.1177/105268460701700601
Buckman, D. G., Johnson, A. D., & Alexander, D. L. (2017). Internal vs external promotion:
advancement of teachers to administrators. Journal of Educational Administration, 56(1),
33–49. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-01-2017-0003
Bush, T. (2012). International perspectives on leadership development: making a
difference. Professional Development in Education, 38(4), 663–678.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2012.660701
Cieminski, A. B. (2018). Practices That Support Leadership Succession and Principal
Retention. Education Leadership Review, 19(1), 21–41.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1200804.pdf
City, E. A., Elmore, R. F., Fiarman, S. E., & Teitel, L. (2009). Instructional rounds in education.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Coelli, M., & Green, D. A. (2012). Leadership effects: School principals and student
outcomes. Economics of Education Review, 31(1), 92–109.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2011.09.001
Collins, J. (2016). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap and others don't.
Instaread.
Crow, G. M. (2006). Complexity and the beginning principal in the United States: perspectives
on socialization. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(4), 310–325.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230610674930
161

Daresh, J. (2004). Mentoring school leaders: Professional promise or predictable
problems? Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(4), 495–517.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X04267114
Dee, T. S., Jacob, B., & Schwartz, N. L. (2013). The effects of NCLB on school resources and
practices. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(2), 252–279.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373712467080
Fink, D., & Brayman, C. (2004). Principals' succession and educational change. Journal of
Educational Administration. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230410544053
Fullan, M. (2002). The role of leadership in the promotion of knowledge management in
schools. Teachers and Teaching, 8(3), 409–419.
https://doi.org/10.1080/135406002100000530
Fullan, M. (2007). Leading in a culture of change. John Wiley & Sons.
Fuller, E. J., Young, M. D., Richardson, M. S., Pendola, A., & Winn, K. M. (2018). The Pre-K–8
School Leader in 2018: A 10-Year Study. National Association of Elementary School
Principals (NAESP). https://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/NAESP%2010-
YEAR%20REPORT_2018.pdf
Gardner-McTaggart, A. (2018). International schools: leadership reviewed. Journal of Research
in International Education, 17(2), 148–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475240918793955
Gardner-McTaggart, A. (2019). Leadership of international schools and the International
Baccalaureate learner profile. Educational Management Administration &
Leadership, 47(5), 766–784. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217745883

162

Gates, S. M., Kaufman, J. H., Doan, S., Tuma, A. P., & Kim, D. (2020). Taking stock of principal
pipelines: What public school districts report doing and what they want to do to improve
school leadership. RAND Corporation.
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA274-1.html.
Goldhaber, D., Holden, K., & Chen, B. (2019). Do More Effective Teachers Become More
Effective Principals? Working Paper No. 215–0119–1. National Center for Analysis of
Longitudinal Data in Education Research (CALDER).
https://caldercenter.org/sites/default/files/CALDER%20WP%20215-0119-1.pdf
Goldring, E., Rubin, M., & Herrmann, M. (2021). The Role of Assistant Principals: Evidence
and Insights for Advancing School Leadership. Wallace Foundation.
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/The-Role-of-Assistant-
Principals-Evidence-Insights-for-Advancing-School-Leadership.pdf
Goldring, R., & Taie, S. (2018). Principal Attrition and Mobility: Results from the 2016–17
Principal Follow-Up Survey. First Look. NCES 2018–066. National Center for Education
Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2018/2018066.pdf
Grenda, J. P., & Hackmann, D. G. (2014). Advantages and challenges of distributing leadership
in middle-level schools. NASSP Bulletin, 98(1), 53–74.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636513514108
Grissom, J. A., Egalite, A. J., & Lindsay, C. A. (2021). How Principals Affect Students and
Schools: A Systematic Synthesis of Two Decades of Research. Research Report. Wallace
Foundation. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/How-
Principals-Affect-Students-and-Schools.pdf
163

Grissom, J. A., & Loeb, S. (2017). Assessing principals’ assessments: Subjective evaluations of
teacher effectiveness in low-and high-stakes environments. Education Finance and
Policy, 12(3), 369–395. https://doi.org/10.1162/EDFP_a_00210
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (1996). Reassessing the principal's role in school effectiveness: A
review of empirical research, 1980–1995. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32(1), 5–
44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X96032001002
Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. H. (2002). What do you call people with visions? The role of vision,
mission and goals in school leadership and improvement. Second international handbook of
educational leadership and administration (pp. 9–40). Springer.
https://www.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0375-9_2
Hargreaves, A. (2005). Leadership succession. Paper presented at the The Educational Forum, ,
69(2) 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131720508984680
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2004). The seven principles of sustainable leadership. Educational
Leadership, 61(7), 8–13. https://www.ascd.org/el/articles/the-seven-principles-of-
sustainable-leadership
Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2012). Sustainable leadership. John Wiley & Sons.
Hargreaves, A., & Goodson, I. (2006). Educational change over time? The sustainability and
nonsustainability of three decades of secondary school change and continuity. Educational
Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 3–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X05277975

164

Hargreaves, A., Moore, S., Fink, D., Brayman, C., & White, R. (2003). Succeeding leaders. A
Study of Principal Rotation and Succession, Report to the Ontario Principals’
Council.Toronto, ON: Ontario Principals’ Council.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dean-
Fink/publication/265047936_Succeeding_Leaders/links/543bc2bd0cf204cab1db282c/Succe
eding-Leaders.pdf
Hart, A. W. (1993). Principal succession: Establishing leadership in schools. Suny Press.
Hausman, C., Nebeker, A., McCreary, J., & Gordon Jr, D. (2002). The worklife of the assistant
principal. Journal of Educational Administration, 40(2), 136–157.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230210421105
Heifetz, R. A., Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009a). The practice of adaptive
leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Harvard
Business Press.
Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009b). Leadership in a (permanent) crisis. Harvard
Business Review, 87(7/8), 62–69.
Hill, I. (2018). A subjectivist model of school leadership for international schools: Greenfield
revisited. Peabody Journal of Education, 93(5), 518–533.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2018.1515827
Johnson, J. F., Uline, C. L., & Perez, L. G. (2011). Expert noticing and principals of high-
performing urban schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 16(2), 122–
136. https://doi.org/10.1080/10824669.2011.559903

165

Kaplan, R. E., & Kaiser, R. B. (2003). Developing versatile leadership. MIT Sloan Management
Review, 44(4), 19–26. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Robert-
Kaiser/publication/40966368_Developing_versatile_leadership/links/54d8a13d0cf25013d03
e7b63/Developing-versatile-leadership.pdf
Keller, D. (2015). Leadership of international schools: Understanding and managing
dualities. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 43(6), 900–917.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143214543201
Keung, E. K., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2013). The relationship between transformational
leadership and cultural intelligence. Journal of Educational Administration.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-04-2012-0049
Kraft, M. A. (2020). Interpreting effect sizes of education interventions. Educational
Researcher, 49(4), 241–253. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20912798
LeChasseur, K., Donaldson, M., Fernandez, E., & Femc-Bagwell, M. (2018). Brokering,
Buffering, and the Rationalities of Principal Work. Journal of Educational
Administration, 56(3), 262–276. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-10-2016-0129
Lee, L. C. (2015). School Performance Trajectories and the Challenges for Principal
Succession. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(2), 262–286.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-12-2012-0139
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven strong claims about successful school
leadership. School Leadership and Management, 28(1), 27–42.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430701800060

166

Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2000). The effects of transformational leadership on organizational
conditions and student engagement with school. Journal of Educational
Administration, 38(2), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230010320064
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2005). A review of transformational school leadership research
1996–2005. Leadership and policy in schools, 4(3), 177–199.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760500244769
Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How Leadership Influences
Student Learning. Review of Research. Wallace Foundation, The,
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/documents/how-leadership-
influences-student-learning.pdf
Levin, S., & Bradley, K. (2019). Understanding and addressing principal turnover: A review of
the research. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.
https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-
files/NASSP_LPI_Principal_Turnover_Research_Review_REPORT.pdf
Levin, S., Scott, C., Yang, M., Leung, M., & Bradley, K. (2020). Supporting a Strong, Stable
Principal Workforce: What Matters and What Can Be Done. Research Report. Learning
Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/supporting-strong-stable-
principal-workforce-brief
Liang, J., & Augustine-Shaw, D. (2016). Mentoring and induction for new assistant principals:
the Kansas Educational Leadership Institute. International Journal of Mentoring and
Coaching in Education, 5(3), 221–238. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-05-2016-0044
Lochmiller, C. R., & Lester, J. N. (2015). An introduction to educational research: Connecting
methods to practice. Sage Publications.
167

Loeb, S., Kalogrides, D., & Béteille, T. (2012). Effective schools: Teacher hiring, assignment,
development, and retention. Education Finance and Policy, 7(3), 269–304.
https://doi.org/10.1162/EDFP_a_00068
Mancuso, S. V ., Roberts, L., & White, G. P. (2010). Teacher retention in international schools:
The key role of school leadership. Journal of Research in International Education, 9(3),
306–323. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475240910388928
McClellan, R. L., & Casey, P. (2015). Lost in Transition? Campus Leaders’ Professional
Pathways. Journal of School Leadership, 25(4), 720–757.
https://doi.org/10.1177/105268461502500406
Merton, R. K., & Merton, R. C. (1968). Social theory and social structure. Simon and Schuster.
Miller, A. (2013). Principal turnover and student achievement. Economics of Education
Review, 36, 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2013.05.004
Morrison, A. R. (2018). Beyond the status quo–setting the agenda for effective change: The role
of leader within an international school environment. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 46(3), 511–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143216682500
Moye, M. J., Henkin, A. B., & Egley, R. J. (2005). Teacher-Principal Relationships: Exploring
Linkages between Empowerment and Interpersonal Trust. Journal of Educational
Administration, 43(3), 260–277. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230510594796
National Policy Board for Educational Administration. (2015). Professional standards for
educational leaders 2015. Reston, VA: Author. https://www.npbea.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/06/Professional-Standards-for-Educational-Leaders_2015.pdf
168

Normore, A. (2007). A continuum approach for developing school leaders in an urban
district. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 2(3), 1–45.
https://doi.org/10.1177/194277510700200305
Normore, A. H. (2004). Socializing school administrators to meet leadership challenges that
doom all but the most heroic and talented leaders to failure. International Journal of
Leadership in Education, 7(2), 107–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360312042000185851
Parfitt, C. M. (2017). Creating a Succession-Planning Instrument for Educational
Leadership. Education Leadership Review, 18(1), 21–36.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1162585.pdf
Parkay, F. W., Currie, G. D., & Rhodes, J. W. (1992). Professional socialization: A longitudinal
study of first-time high school principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28(1), 43–
75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X92028001003
Parylo, O., Zepeda, S. J., & Bengtson, E. (2012). The different faces of principal
mentorship. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 1(2), 120.
https://doi.org/10.1108/20466851211262860
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and
practice. Sage publications.
Peters-Hawkins, A. L., Reed, L. C., & Kingsberry, F. (2018). Dynamic leadership succession:
Strengthening urban principal succession planning. Urban Education, 53(1), 26–54.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916682575
Prociw, S., & Eberle, F. (2016). Shift in emphasis in new standards for educational
leaders. Policy Update, 23(1)
https://nasbe.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/2016/01/Prociw_Leader-Stds-Final.pdf
169

Rigby, J. G., Andrews-Larson, C., & Chen, I. C. (2020). Learning opportunities about teaching
mathematics: A longitudinal case study of school leaders’ influence. Teachers College
Record, 122(7), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146812012200710
Roberts, L., & Mancuso, S. V . (2014). What kind of international school leaders are in demand
around the world? A test of differences by region and stability over time. Journal of
Research in International Education, 13(2), 91–105.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1475240914532214
Rothwell, W. (2010). Effective succession planning: Ensuring leadership continuity and building
talent from within. Amacom.
Schleicher, A. (2012). Preparing teachers and developing school leaders for the 21st century:
Lessons from around the world. OECD Publishing. 2, rue Andre Pascal, F-75775 Paris
Cedex 16, France. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264174559-en
Schmidt-Davis, J., & Bottoms, G. (2011). Who's Next? Let's Stop Gambling on School
Performance and Plan for Principal Succession. Southern Regional Education Board
(SREB). https://www.sreb.org/sites/main/files/file-
attachments/11v19_principal_succession_planning.pdf?1459947373 .
Searby, L., Browne-Ferrigno, T., & Wang, C. (2017). Assistant principals: Their readiness as
instructional leaders. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 16(3), 397–430.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2016.1197281
Simkins, T. (2005). Leadership in Education: ‘What Works’ or ‘What Makes
Sense’? Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 33(1), 9–26.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143205048168

170

Spillane, J. P., Camburn, E. M., & Stitziel Pareja, A. (2007). Taking a distributed perspective to
the school principal's workday. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6(1), 103–125.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760601091200
Syed, S. (2015). Building Principal Pipelines: A Strategy to Strengthen Education Leadership.
Update. Wallace Foundation. https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-
center/Documents/Building-Principal-Pipelines-A-Strategy-to-Strengthen-Education-
Leadership.pdf
Taie, S., & Goldring, R. (2017). Characteristics of Public Elementary and Secondary School
Principals in the United States: Results from the 2015–16 National Teacher and Principal
Survey. First Look. NCES 2017–070. National Center for Education Statistics.
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2017/2017070.pdf
Turnbull, B. J., Haslam, M. B., Arcaira, E. R., Riley, D. L., Sinclair, B., & Coleman, S. (2009).
Evaluation of the School Administration Manager Project. Policy Studies Associates, Inc.
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/Evaluation-of-the-
School-Administration-Manager-Project.pdf
Turnbull, B. J., Riley, D. L., & MacFarlane, J. R. (2013). Cultivating Talent through a Principal
Pipeline. Building a Stronger Principalship: V olume 2. Policy Studies Associates, Inc.
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/Building-a-Stronger-
Principalship-V ol-2-Cultivating-Talent-in-a-Principal-Pipeline.pdf
Turnbull, B. J., Riley, D. L., & MacFarlane, J. R. (2015). Districts Taking Charge of the Principal
Pipeline. Building a Stronger Principalship: V olume 3. Policy Studies Associates, Inc.
https://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/documents/building-a-stronger-
principalship-vol3-districts-taking-charge.pdf
171

Van Maanen, J. E., & Schein, E. H. (1977). Toward a theory of organizational socialization.
Villani, S. (2006). Mentoring and induction programs that support new principals. Corwin Press.
Walker, A., & Dimmock, C. (2005, September). Leading the multiethnic school: Research
evidence on successful practice. In The Educational Forum (V ol. 69, No. 3, pp. 291–304).
Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131720508984697
Waters, T., Marzano, R. J., & McNulty, B. (2003). Balanced Leadership: What 30 Years of
Research Tells Us about the Effect of Leadership on Student Achievement. A Working
Paper. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED481972.pdf
Weiss, R. S. (1995). Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview
studies. Simon and Schuster.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. Systems Thinker, 9(5),
2–3. https://thesystemsthinker.com/communities-of-practice-learning-as-a-social-system/
Zepeda, S. J., Bengtson, E., & Parylo, O. (2012). Examining the Planning and Management of
Principal Succession. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(2), 136–158.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231211210512

172

Appendix A: Senior Leadership Team Interview Protocol
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I appreciate the time that you have set
aside to answer my questions. As I mentioned when we last spoke, the interview should take
about 75 minutes, does that still work for you?
Before we get started, I want to remind you about this study, the overview for which was
provided to you in the Study Information Sheet and answer any questions you might have about
participating in this interview. I am a student at USC and am conducting a study that explores
how this school approaches leadership succession at the principal and assistant principal levels. I
have asked to speak with you today as I am interested in understanding as much as possible
about this school’s approach to planning, managing, and supporting the process of principal and
assistant principal succession. I want to assure you that I am strictly assuming the role of
researcher today. What this means is that the nature of my questions is not evaluative. I will not
be making any judgments on how you are performing in your role. My goal is to understand your
perspective.
As stated in the Study Information Sheet I provided to you previously, this interview is
confidential. What that means is that your name will not be shared with anyone. The data for this
study will be compiled into a report and while I do plan on using some of what you say as direct
quotes, none of this data will be directly attributed to you. I will use a pseudonym to protect your
confidentiality and will try my best to de-identify any of the data I gather from you. I will keep
the data in a password protected computer and all data will be destroyed after 3 years. Although I
will be taking notes today, it would help if I could record our conversation so that I may
accurately capture your responses. You do not have to answer anything that you do not feel
173

comfortable with, and I will turn off the recording at any time you request. May I have your
permission to record?
Setting the Stage
I’d like to start by learning a little more about you and your current school
1. Can you tell me about your journey into international
school leadership?
• How did you enter the field of education?
• What drew you to international school
education?
• How did you become interested in the field of
educational leadership?
• What roles and positions have you held?

Opening

CF: Leading in an
International School
Context
2. How would you describe your current school?
• What is the school’s mission and vision mean
for you?
• What does the typical student experience look
like and feel like?
• How does your school community define
success for your school?

Background

CF: Leading in an
International School
Context
3. Tell me about your role at this school?
• If I followed you for a typical day, what would I
see you doing?
• What would an ideal day in your role look like?
• What do you see as the benefits of your role?
• What are some of the challenges?
• How do you define success in your role?
• Which past experiences helped to prepared you
for your current role?
• How does your role support the work of
principals and assistant principals as AIS?

Background

CF: Succession
Planning

RQ2
4. Describe an effective principal?
• What do effective principals do?
• Why are they important?
• What are the signs of a high quality
principalship at AIS?
• How do principals at AIS know that they are
being effective?

Values & opinions

Background

CF: Effective
Principal Leadership
174

Heart of the Interview
Now I’d like to ask you more about your work related to planning, managing and
supporting principal and assistant principal succession at your school.
5. Think back to a recent principal or assistant principal
succession event at AIS. Please describe the event and
tell me about your role in the event.

Experience, Behavior
& Knowledge

CF: Managing
Principal Succession

6. Tell me about the recruitment and selection process
your school used when hiring recent principal/assistant
principals?
• What were the key search criteria?
• How were these determined?
• How is the position drafted and advertised?
• What skill sets were targeted during the
process?
• Who was involved in the selection process?
• How was the outcome determined?
• How did the selection process compare with
others that you have experienced?

Experience, Behavior
& Knowledge

RQ1

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
7. Please describe the supports offered by the school to
the incoming principals/assistant principal prior to them
commencing their role, if at all.
• Was a transition plan developed prior to arrival?
• Who took the lead in designing and
implementing this phase of the onboarding
process?
• What would you say were the objectives of this
stage of the process?
• Who are the key people involved in the
implementation of this process?
• What role did they play?
• What did the process itself look like?
• Looking back, what might you change about
this part of the process?

Experience &
Behavior, Opinions &
Values, and
Knowledge questions

RQ1 & RQ2

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
175

8. Describe how your school supported the incoming
principal/assistant principal once they formally
commenced their new role, if at all.
• Who took the lead in designing and
implementing this phase of your onboarding
process?
• What would you say were the objectives of this
stage of the process?
• Who are the key people involved in the
implementation of this process?
• What role did they play?
• What did the process itself look like?
• Looking back, what might you change about
this part of the process?

Experience &
Behavior, Opinions &
Value, and
Knowledge questions

RQ1 & RQ2

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
9. How would you describe the overall transition of the
incoming principal/assistant principal?
• What have been the strengths of the onboarding
process?
• What are some areas for growth?
• What have been the most valuable supports?
• What supports would you like to see in the
future?

Values & Opinions,

RQ1 & RQ2

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
10. Some researchers have argued that frequent principal
succession has the potential to seriously undermine
school improvement efforts. What are your thoughts on
that perspective?
• What are the factors that contribute to principal
succession here at AIS?
• How can school support their improvement
efforts in spite of frequent principal succession?

Devil’s Advocate,

RQ1 & RQ2

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
& Succession
Planning in Education
11. Suppose one of your principals tells you they are
resigning and leaving the country tomorrow. Tell me
what you would do step by step.
• Who could step in to pick up their
responsibilities?
• What would be prioritized in the new search
process?
• What would your recruitment process look like?
• Tell me about the selection process you would
use?
• What would you prioritize in your onboarding
process?
Hypothetical,

RQ1 & RQ2

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
& Succession
Planning in Education
176

• What are some of the challenges unique to AIS?

12. Some schools might argue that an essential component
of any succession plan is the process of identifying and
developing high potential faculty for specific leadership
positions. What are your thoughts on that perspective?
• How does your school identify its future
leaders, if at all?
• How does your school build capacity in its
future leaders, if at all?
• How would you describe the pathway to the
principalship in your school?
• How does the role of the assistant principal
support principal preparation here at AIS, if at
all?
• What are the potential advantages of developing
future leaders at AIS?
• What are some potential challenges in
developing future leaders at AIS?

Devil’s Advocate,

RQ1 & RQ2

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
& Succession
Planning in Education
13. Some principals would say it is impossible to find time
to mentor and develop future school leaders due to the
increasing demands of the job. What advice would you
have for these principals?
• How are principals at AIS expected to prioritize
their time?
• Is leadership development an expectation that is
articulated in the principal job description?
• Is it part of the principal evaluation process?

Devil’s Advocate,

RQ1 & RQ2

CF: Effective
Principal Leadership
& Succession
Planning in Education
14. Moving forward, what are some ways in which AIS
might improve its approach to developing future school
leaders?

Opinions & Values

RQ1 & RQ2

Succession Planning
in Education

Closing Question
15. Is there anything else you would like to share about how AIS plans for, manages, and
supports the process of principal and assistant principal succession?
177

Closing Comments
Thank you so much for you sharing your thoughts with me today! I really appreciate your
time and willingness to share. Everything that you have shared is really helpful for my study. If I
find myself with a follow-up question, can I contact you, and if so, is email ok? Again, thank you
for taking the time to participate in my study and please don’t hesitate to get in contact if you
have any questions.

178

Appendix B: Principal and Assistant Principal Interview Protocol
Thank you for agreeing to participate in my study. I appreciate the time that you have set
aside to answer my questions. As I mentioned when we last spoke, the interview should take
about 75 minutes, does that still work for you?
Before we get started, I want to remind you about this study, the overview for which was
provided to you in the Study Information Sheet and answer any questions you might have about
participating in this interview. I am a student at USC and am conducting a study that explores
how this school approaches leadership succession at the principal and assistant principal levels. I
have asked to speak with you today as you have recently transitioned to the role of
principal/assistant principal at AIS and I am interested in understanding as much as possible
about your recruitment into the role; your thoughts on the onboarding process; and your
perspectives on any ongoing organizational supports you receive, if at all. I want to assure you
that I am strictly assuming the role of researcher today. What this means is that the nature of my
questions is not evaluative. I will not be making any judgments on how you are performing in
your role. My goal is to understand your perspective.
As stated in the Study Information Sheet I provided to you previously, this interview is
confidential. What that means is that your name will not be shared with anyone. The data for this
study will be compiled into a report and while I do plan on using some of what you say as direct
quotes, none of this data will be directly attributed to you. I will use a pseudonym to protect your
confidentiality and will try my best to de-identify any of the data I gather from you. I will keep
the data in a password protected computer and all data will be destroyed after 3 years. Although I
will be taking notes today, it would help if I could record our conversation so that I may
accurately capture your responses. You do not have to answer anything that you do not feel
179

comfortable with, and I will turn off the recording at any time you request. May I have your
permission to record?
Setting the Stage
I’d like to start by learning a little more about you and your current school
1. Can you tell me about your journey into international
school leadership?
• How did you enter the field of education?
• What drew you to international school
education?
• How did you become interested in the field of
educational leadership?
• What roles and positions have you held?

Opening
CF: Leading in an
International School
Context
2. How would you describe your current school?
• What is the school’s mission and vision mean
for you?
• What does the typical student experience look
like and feel like?
• How does your school community define
success for your school?

Background
CF: Leading in an
International School
Context
3. Tell me about your role at this school?
• If I followed you for a typical day, what would I
see you doing?
• What would an ideal day in your role look like?
• What do you see as the benefits of your role?
• What are some of the challenges?
• How do you define success in your role?
• Which past experiences helped to prepared you
for your current role?

Background

CF: Succession
Planning

RQ2
4. Describe an effective principal?
• What do effective principals do?
• Why are they important?
• What are the signs of a high quality
principalship at AIS?
• How do principals at AIS know that they are
being effective?

Values & opinions
Background

CF: Effective
Principal Leadership

180

Heart of the Interview
Now I’d like to ask you more about the recruitment, selection and onboarding process at
AIS.
5. Tell me about the selection process you experienced as
a Principal candidate?
• What skill sets were targeted in the selection
process?
• Who was involved in the selection process?
• Which community members were involved in
the process?
• How did the selection process compare with
others that you have experienced?

Experience, Behavior
& Knowledge

RQ1 & RQ3

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
6. Please describe any professional support offered to you
by the school prior to entering your current role, if at
all.
• Who took the lead in implementing this phase
of your onboarding process?
• Were you able to play a role in designing
elements of this process?
• What would you say were the objectives of this
stage of the process?
• Who were the key people involved in the
implementation of this process?
• What role did they play?
• What did the process itself look like?
• Looking back, what might you change about
this part of the process?

Experience &
Behavior, Opinions &
Value, and
Knowledge questions

RQ1, RQ2, & RQ3

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
7. Describe how your school supported you once you
formally commenced your new role, if at all.
• Who took the lead in implementing this phase
of your onboarding process?
• Were you able to play a role in designing
elements of this process?
• What would you say were the objectives of this
stage of the process?
• Who were the key people involved in the
implementation of this process?
• What role did they play?
• What did the process itself look like?
Experience &
Behavior, Opinions &
Value, and
Knowledge questions

RQ1, RQ2, & RQ3

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
181

• Looking back, what might you change about
this part of the process?

8. Before starting your role as a principal/assistant
principal here at AIS, what did you expect your
experience to be like?
• How has your experience been similar to what
you expected?
• How has it been different to what you expected?

Interpretive

RQ2 & RQ3

CF: Effective
Principal Leadership

9. How would you describe your overall transition into
your current role?
• What have been the strengths of the onboarding
process?
• What are some areas for growth?
• What have been the most valuable supports?
• What support would you like to see in the
future?

Values & Opinions

RQ2 & RQ3

CF: Managing
Principal Succession

10. Suppose one of the assistant principals on your team
tells you they are resigning and leaving the country
tomorrow. You have been asked to lead the process of
finding a successor. Tell me what you would do step by
step.
• Who could step in to pick up their
responsibilities?
• What would be prioritized in the new search
process?
• What would your recruitment process look like?
• Tell me about the selection process you would
use?
• What would you prioritize in your onboarding
process?
• What are some of the challenges unique to AIS?

Hypothetical,

RQ1 & RQ2

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
& Succession
Planning in Education
11. Some schools might argue that an essential component
of any succession plan is the process of identifying and
developing high potential faculty for specific leadership
positions. What are your thoughts on that perspective?
• How does your school identify its future
leaders, if at all?
• How does your school build capacity in its
future leaders, if at all?
• How would you describe the pathway to the
principalship in your school?
Devil’s Advocate,

RQ1 & RQ2

CF: Managing
Principal Succession
& Succession
Planning in Education
182

• How does the role of the assistant principal
support principal preparation here at AIS, if at
all?
• What are the potential advantages of developing
future leaders at AIS?
• What are some potential challenges in
developing future leaders at AIS?

12. Some principals would say it is impossible to find time
to mentor and develop future school leaders due to the
increasing demands of the job. What advice would you
have for these principals?
• How are principals at AIS expected to prioritize
their time?
• Is leadership development an expectation that is
articulated in the principal job description?
• Is it part of the principal evaluation process?

Devil’s Advocate,

RQ2 & RQ3

CF: Effective
Principal Leadership
& Succession
Planning in Education
13. Moving forward, what are some ways in which AIS
might improve its approach to developing future school
leaders?

Opinions & Values

RQ1 & RQ2

Succession Planning
in Education

Closing Question
14. Is there anything else you would like to share about your recruitment and onboarding
process, or the ongoing support you receive in your role?
Closing Comments
Thank you so much for you sharing your thoughts with me today! I really appreciate your
time and willingness to share. Everything that you have shared is really helpful for my study. If I
find myself with a follow-up question, can I contact you, and if so, is email ok? Again, thank you
for taking the time to participate in my study and please don’t hesitate to get in contact if you
have any questions.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Building charter school leadership capacity: a look into leadership practices at accelerated academy

PDF

Building leadership capacity to support principal succession

PDF

Principal leadership succession: developing the next generation of leaders

PDF

What can districts do to retain high school assistant principals?

PDF

The factors supporting or inhibiting Teachers of Color to accept and stay in an international school in Southeast Asia

PDF

Leadership succession: promising practices to develop a sustainable leadership pipeline at a secondary school

PDF

Sustaining quality leadership at prep academy charter schools: promising practices for leadership development in public schools

PDF

Implementing Chinese-English dual language programs in international schools: a study for an international school in southeast Asia

PDF

The role of international school teacher leaders in building leadership capacity within their teams

PDF

Building leadership capacity from the top: how superintendents empower principals to lead schools

PDF

Success factors for global virtual team leaders: a qualitative study of leaders of global virtual teams in a global professional service firm employing grounded theory

PDF

The first-time manager journey: a study to inform a smoother leadership transition

PDF

Public school district principals in California: preparation, recruitment, and retention

PDF

Promising practices: building the next generation of effective school principals

PDF

Cultivating effective and resilient urban principals: empowering school leaders to create enduring success in the inner city

PDF

How urban high school principals implement social and emotional learning (SEL)

PDF

Principals’ leadership influence on teachers’ capacity to enact 21st-century skills curriculum

PDF

Teacher leadership for personalized learning: An implementation study in an international school

PDF

Building the next generation of leaders in K–6 institutions

PDF

In the shadows: the perceived experiences of women principals in secondary schools

Asset Metadata

Creator Trainor, Timothy Michael (author)

Core Title Managing leadership transitions in an international school context

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Degree Conferral Date 2022-05

Publication Date 04/20/2022

Defense Date 04/01/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag international school,leadership pipeline,leadership transitions,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational socialization,principal succession,steppingstone roles,succession planning

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Picus, Lawrence (committee chair), Cash, David (committee member), Robles, Darline (committee member)

Creator Email timothytrainor@gmail.com,ttrainor@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC111037692

Unique identifier UC111037692

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Trainor, Timothy Michael

Type texts

Source 20220421-usctheses-batch-931 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu