Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Quarterly
http://eaq.sagepub.com/
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
Additional services and information for Educational Administration Quarterly can be found
at:
Email Alerts: http://eaq.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://eaq.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Citations: http://eaq.sagepub.com/content/46/2/174.refs.html
Downloaded from eaq.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on August 3, 2010
Article
Participative
Decision Making
in Schools: A
Mediating-Moderating
Analytical Framework
for Understanding
School and Teacher
Outcomes
Anit Somech1
Abstract
The increasing emergence of participation in decision making (PDM) in schools
reflects the widely shared belief that flatter management and decentralized
authority structures carry the potential for promoting school effectiveness.
However, the literature indicates a discrepancy between the intuitive appeal
of PDM and empirical evidence in respect of its sweeping advantages. The
purpose of this theoretical article is to develop a comprehensive model
for understanding the distinct impacts of PDM on school and teachers
outcomes. The proposed analytical framework is set within contingency theory
and is aimed to predict the distinct impacts of PDM on school outcomes:
innovation, organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), and productivity;
and on teacher outcomes: job satisfaction and strain. It contains mediatormoderator components, where the mediator factors explain the relationship
between PDM and school and teacher outcomes and the moderator
factors influence the strength and/or the direction of these relationships.
1
Corresponding Author:
Anit Somech, Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, Haifa, Israel 31905,
ISRAEL
Email: anits@construct.haifa.ac.il
175
Somech
176
Cognitive
Mechanism
School Outcomes
- Productivity
- Innovation
PDM
- Organizational
Citizenship
Behavior (OCB)
Motivational
Mechanism
Teachers Outcomes
- Job satisfaction
- Strain
177
Somech
178
179
Somech
180
and responsibilities of the assigned role (Van Dyne, Cummings, & McLean
Parks, 1995, p. 222). Theoretically, PDM can promote teacher productivity
directly and indirectly (Locke & Schweiger, 1979). Directly, it is thought
to improve the quality of educational decision making by giving administrators access to critical information close to the source of the problems of
schooling, namely, the classroom (Tschannen-Moran, 2001). In addition, the
participation process helps ensure that unanticipated problems that arise during
work can be tackled directly and immediately by those affected by the problem
(Durham, Knight, & Locke, 1997). Furthermore, because teachers have an
opportunity to be involved in and to exert influence on decision-making processes, their participation is believed to increase willingness to implement
them in class, hence to promote educational productivity (Griffin, 1995; Hoy &
Trater, 1993). Indirect benefits have generally been higher levels of teacher
morale and job satisfaction, manifested in less absence and tardiness as well
as reduced interpersonal conflict (De Dreu, 2006), which in turn may raise
levels of performance.
Like studies of productivity in the business sector, research on productivity outcomes of PDM in schools generally yields equivocal conclusions.
Some studies indicate that participation is positively related to teacher performance in class (e.g., Gebert, Boerner & Lanwehr, 2003; San Antonio &
Gamage, 2007), others that it may not lead to any meaningful change at the
classroom level, or can even be a source of stress for teachers hence lead to a
lowering of teacher performance (e.g., Sato, Hyler, & Monte-Sano, 2002).
Yet other studies suggest that the link between PDM and productivity is not
linear, that is, midlevel participation is the best practice for improving teacher
performance (Conway, 1984).
School innovation. Schools face a highly competitive and dynamic environment, which necessitates flexibility and fast adaptation to new situations and
changing contexts (De Dreu, 2006; Koka, Madhavan, & Prescott, 2006), so
innovation has become a vital asset to ensure school sustainability. School
innovation is defined here as the intentional introduction and application in
the school of new ideas, processes, products, or procedures designed to benefit
it significantly (West & Wallace, 1991). Proponents of PDM (e.g., Murphy &
Beck, 1995; West, 2002) see participative administrators as seeking to encourage teachers to discover new opportunities and challenges and to learn through
acquiring, sharing, and combining knowledge (cf. Edmondson, 1999). The
research literature (e.g., De Dreu & West, 2001) suggests that participation is
critical for the schools ability to turn new ideas and individually held knowledge into innovative procedures, services, and products.
181
Somech
As Cohen and Levinthal (1990) noted, participation of teachers each possessing diverse and different knowledge will augment the schools capacity
for making novel linkages and associations beyond what any individual can
achieve. Innovation needs the absorptive capacity to recognize, assimilate,
and apply creative ideas. This capacity will be higher when teachers participate in decision making (Kahai, Sosik, & Avolio, 1997; Peterson, 1997;
West, 2002). Teachers in participative environments can increase the pool of
ideas, materials, and methods (Somech, 2006). Participation in the decisionmaking process might also encourage teachers to experiment with innovative
practices in curriculum and pedagogy (Firestone & Pennell, 1993).
Empirical research yields generally consistent evidence of a positive link
between PDM and innovation (e.g., Bryk, Easton, Kerbow, Rollow, & Sebring,
1993; Somech, 2006; Wong, 1994). For example, OHara (2001) examined
the effects of leadership style on innovation; 64 teams were instructed to
perform some type of school/community service project, and independent
judges rated them on two dimensions: how creative and how worthwhile.
Overall, the results indicated that a more participative style produced more
creative and more worthwhile projects than a directive style. Similarly,
Somech (2006) found that strong emphasis on the participative management
approach encouraged teachers to engage more in innovative practices at the
school level (whole school projects) as well as at the class level (curriculum
and pedagogy).
Organizational citizenship behavior. Operating under changing circumstances,
schools are necessarily becoming more dependent on teachers who are willing to contribute to school, regardless of formal job requirements (DiPaola &
Hoy, 2005). These nonprescribed organizationally beneficial behaviors are
known as organizational citizenship behavior. OCB is defined here as those
behaviors that go beyond specified role requirements and are directed toward
students, colleagues, and supervisors, or the school as a unit, in order to promote organizational goals (Somech & Drach-Zahavy, 2000).
Theoretically, PDM is linked to OCB in a number of ways (Bogler &
Somech, 2005). First, recent literature (e.g., Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine, &
Bacharach, 2000; Tepper & Taylor, 2003) suggests that teachers perform
OCBs more frequently when they perceive as fair the means by which their
schools and their representatives make allocation decisions (i.e., procedural
justice). Teacher participation can enhance a sense of fairness and trust in the
school because they can defend their own interests and because they get
information on the shaping of decisions to which they would not otherwise
be privy. This sense of fairness enhances teacher willingness to engage in
OCBs (VanYperen, Van den Berg, & Willering, 1999). Second, because
182
teachers understand work processes and challenges better than administrators or policy makers, their participation ensures that better information will
be available for making decisions to facilitate a better performance (Conley &
Bacharach, 1990). Teachers who view their school as behaving in their interest should experience greater job satisfaction, but also act to return the favor
by exhibiting more OCBs (Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002). Third, participation, especially in managerial issues, which deals with school operations and
administration (e.g., setting school goals, hiring staff, allocating budget,
evaluating teachers), widens the teacher focus from the immediate outcomes
in their own classrooms to the organization as a whole. Through participation
and the exercise of influence, teachers develop an organizational system
approach, which expands their perspectives beyond their formal role (Senge,
1990, 1993). This approach may thereby lead them to invest extra effort in the
school, namely, OCBs, such as volunteering for roles and tasks that are not
obligatory (Somech & Bogler, 2002).
A review of the educational literature revealed two studies on the link
between PDM and teacher OCB (Bogler & Somech, 2004; Somech & Bogler,
2002). Consistent with research in private organizations (e.g., VanYperen
et al., 1999), their findings demonstrated a positive link between PDM and
OCB. Teachers who were invited to participate in decision making on issues
related to the school as an organization tended to exhibit higher levels of
OCBs toward their students and colleagues and toward the school as a whole.
Another pragmatic rationale of PDM was its contribution to the quality of the
teachers work life. It was argued (Conley et al., 1988) that teachers participation in school governance could serve as a form of job enlargement to
offset the traditional lack of career advancement opportunities and incentives
for teachers (Duke & Gansneder, 1990). Maeroff (1988) maintained that
PDM was essential for the teachers self-esteem and status.
Teachers job satisfaction. Participative studies have usually concentrated
on the relationship of participation to job satisfaction, which is defined here
as positive teacher attitudes and beliefs regarding several aspects of the job
or the profession (Organ, 1990). Affective models see this link as crucial
(Kim, 2002). Researchers in the tradition of McGregor (1960), Likert (1967),
and Coch and French (1948) still assert strongly the importance of participation in causing affective changes in workers. They predict that participation
will influence satisfaction in a wide variety of situations.
Evidence from general organization suggests that PDM increases employees job satisfaction (Sagie, Zaidman, Amichai-Hamburger, Teeni, & Schwartz,
2002; Witt et al., 2000). Locke and Schweiger (1979) reviewed laboratory
183
Somech
184
185
Somech
and strain: with low level of participative decision making, stress may arise from a
lack of meaningfulness and control at work; with high level of participation, stress
may arise from the limits (or perceived limits) of human adaptability for responsibility, time pressure, and work load. In terms of Johnsons (1992) notion of
constraints on behavior and attitudes, an individuals preference for elevated job
enrichment might be motivated by needs but also constricted by ability.
Motivational Models
Most past research has implicitly or explicitly focused on PDM as a motivational technique, as a means of raising job satisfaction, which in turn fosters
school outcomes (Durham et al., 1997). The idea that happy teachers are also
productive teachers (the happy-productive worker hypothesis) has a long
history, starting with the human relations movement in the 1920s (Taris,
2006). This movement was largely responsible for the increased attention
paid to participation in organizations over the past several decades. As an
outgrowth of the human relations movement, the participative decision-making movement focuses on the needs of employees and posits organizations
responsibility to meet them. This perspective proposes that participation will
lead to greater attainment of high-order needs, such as self-expression,
respect, interdependence, and equality (McCaffrey et al., 2001), which in
turn will elevate morale and satisfaction; and improving employee satisfaction should result in higher organizational outcomes (Fisher, 2003; Taris,
2006). The cycle is reinforced when individuals whose needs are satisfied put
in greater effort toward achieving organizational goals, which then enhances
satisfaction outcomes (Scott-Ladd et al., 2006). However, no empirically
strong or theoretically compelling relationship between job satisfaction and
organizational outcomes is apparent.
With respect to the educational setting, the literature suggests that PDM
promotes school and teacher outcomes through two motivational mechanisms:
organizational commitment and teacher empowerment (Somech, 2005). First,
186
187
Somech
Cognitive Models
More recently, scholars have suggested that the most consistent benefits of
PDM lie in the cognitive realm (Durham et al., 1997; Latham, Winters, &
Locke, 1994; Sagie et al., 2002; Scully et al., 1995). Cognitive models suggest
that PDM is a viable strategy because it enhances the flow and use of important information in organizations (Guzzo, 1996). Theories supporting such
models (Durham et al., 1997) propose that teachers typically have more complete knowledge of their work than management; so if teachers participate in
decision making, decisions will be made with a better pool of information.
Teacher participation is thought to give administrators access to critical information closest to the source of many problems of schooling, namely, the
classroom. Increased access to and use of this information are thought to
improve the quality of curricular and instructional decisions (Smylie et al., 1996).
Cognitive models likewise suggest that if teachers participate in decision
making they will know more about implementing work procedures after decisions have been made (Sagie et al., 2002). Accordingly, participation encourages
teachers to discover new opportunities and challenges, to learn through acquiring, sharing, and combining knowledge (cf. Edmondson, 1999; West, 2002).
This process includes clarification of problems, information seeking, data
sharing, resonance of ideas, and synthesis of viewpoints (Cannon-Bowers,
Tannenbaum, Salas, & Volpe, 1995; Sagie et al., 2002), which in turn may
promote cooperation and collaboration that foster educative exchanges
among teachers and administrators about matters of curriculum and instruction. Participative processes may engage teachers in the types of open and
collaborative interactions most conducive to learning and change (Smylie
et al., 1996). Consequently, these cognitive mechanisms have the potential to
promote school and teacher outcomes. Latham et al. (1994) and Durham
et al. (1997) demonstrated that even where no motivational effect of PDM is
present, the cognitive processes help in enhancing organizational and employees outcomes.
In sum, the motivational and the cognitive models are not mutually exclusive, but each emphasizes a different explanatory mechanism, and all play
important roles in the participative process.
188
189
Somech
These five personality characteristics are Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Openness to Experience.
Extraversion. Extraverted people seek out the company of others and prefer
a high level of social interaction with a wide variety of people (Sak, 2004).
Working in a participative management environment tends to foster more
interaction among team members and requires individuals who have robust
social skills (Lawler, 1992). Therefore, highly extraverted teachers who derive
their energy from other people and are drained by being alone (Barrick,
Mount, & Judge, 2001) may be more positively affected by PDM than introverted teachers.
Agreeableness. Agreeableness involves getting along with others in pleasant, satisfying relationships (Judge, Heller, & Mount, 2002) and an inclination
to work harmoniously (Carson & Lowman, 2002). Earlier research found
that agreeableness is a good predictor of job performance in situations where
joint action and interpersonal relationships are needed (Judge et al., 2002).
The work environment of PDM is characterized as one with a fairly high
level of interpersonal interaction, which requires tolerance, selflessness, and
flexibility that are in concert with a personality high on agreeableness (Witt &
Burke, 2003).
Conscientiousness. Conscientiousness refers to the extent to which individuals are organized, thorough, responsible, disciplined, motivated, and
ambitious (Goldberg, 1992). Conscientious teachers enjoy opportunities to
fulfill their higher-order needs, such as more challenging, meaningful, and
responsible work (Gellatly, 1996). PDM gives teachers more responsibility
and also inherently signals that the school recognizes that he or she can
make important contributions to it (Luthans, 1995). Thus, high conscientious
teachers, who have higher expectations and themselves set higher goals
(Gellatly, 1996), may be more positively affected by PDM than low conscientious teachers.
Neuroticism. The general tendency to experience negative affect, such as fear,
sadness, embarrassment, anger, guilt, and disgust, is the core of the neurotic
domain (Costa & McCrae, 1992). Teachers high in neuroticism experience
more strain in their interactions with others and perceive daily events more
negatively (Gunthert, Cohen, & Armeli, 1999). Szymura and Wodniecka
(2003) reported that when individuals undertook more demanding tasks,
higher levels of neuroticism were associated with worse task performance
and higher level of strain. The variety of demands that arise in a participative
management environment, such as interpersonal relationships, collaboration,
and responsibility for others (Thoms et al., 2002), might be perceived by
neurotic teachers as a threat and thus increases their probability of feeling
190
negative affect in response (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984; Suls, 2001) and
might lead to low levels of performance (Spreitzer, 2007).
Openness to Experience. Openness to experience refers to intellectual curiosity and a preference for variety (Costa & McCrae, 1992). This portrayal
suggests that teachers high in openness to experience might be especially and
positively receptive to PDM, which challenges traditional practices, institutes
autonomy, calls for openness to new suggestions or ideas, and sets innovative
objectives (West, 2002). A shared decision-making process is also likely to
provide open-minded teachers the opportunity to experience the variety
they seek, which should afford them satisfaction as they can express this
need (Tett & Burnett, 2003). As such, PDM accords with a personality highly
open to experience.
The literature yielded one study, by Benoliel (2007), on the moderator role
of the Big Five among teachers. Overall, her findings indicated that the impact
of PDM on school and teacher outcomes was contingent in nature, and the
personality dimensions of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness,
and neuroticism served as moderators in the relationships between PDM and
teacher performance, job satisfaction, and strain. However, no moderating
effect of openness to experience was found. In sum, a better fit between personality and PDM has a positive influence on school and teacher outcomes.
191
Somech
job satisfaction and performance and increasing job strain. Hence the advantage of PDM depends on the pattern of the teacher-principal relationship
(Ardichvili, 2001). One study on the interactive effect of LMX among teachers was conducted by Somech and Wenderow (2006), which focused only on
one outcome: teachers performance. Although a positive relationship was
indicated between participation and teachers performance, regardless of
LMX level, these authors found that nonparticipative leadership was positively associated with teacher performance in a low-quality LMX relationship.
They concluded that teachers who develop low-quality relationships with
their principals do not expect to be part of the participation process. Therefore,
nonparticipative practice, which is characterized by a top-down influence
and more formal and limited interactions, might be more appropriate to promote those teacher performances than the practice of participation.
An organizations design features the integrating and coordinating mechanisms necessary to accomplish its primary task; decision making is the human
behavior inherent in these mechanisms (Neumann, 1989). The main purpose
of organizational design is to maintain a fit of strategy, organizing mode, and
individuals (Neumann, 1989). The literature identified two main designs: the
bureaucratic and the organic (e.g., Cogliser & Schriesheim, 2000; Lee &
Loeb, 2000). In bureaucratic organizations, efforts are directed to the creation of certainty through such mechanisms as centralization of authority,
routinization of the jobs requirements, and formalization of work through
extensive emphasis on documentation and written procedures (Bacharach
et al., 1990; Drach-Zahavy et al., 2004). In schools of this kind the instructional programs are more specialized and human relationships are more
formal (Lee & Loeb, 2000). While bureaucratic structuring is a mechanism
of direct control, the organic approach holds that the job is accomplished by
ensuring that teachers are given the resources and opportunities to assume
direct responsibility for it. Here, high performance is assured through the
teachers being given enough autonomy to do their job, good learning conditions, and free access to feedback and by being made to feel that they are
rewarded for their own efforts directly (Bacharach et al., 1990; Hackman, 1992).
Researchers have argued that PDM requires a certain context, over and
above a set of programs or techniques (Parnell & Crandall, 2001), as the purpose of participation is to achieve coherence within and among areas of
choices. In bureaucratic schools significant decisions about strategy, policy,
and organizing mode may lie outside the arena of participation. The school
does not require participation in order to function, and teacher potential contribution to it is generally modest; at best PDM serves as a somewhat
192
noncommittal channel of communication. It may make a small contribution to improving the atmosphere or offer some compensation for frustrating
aspects of the work situation (Koopman & Wierdsma, 1998). Accordingly, a
participative scheme that runs parallel to the primary decision-making processes of the school might have a negative impact on school and teacher
outcomes because the participative effort might be perceived as less important to the organization, or even manipulative on its part. For example,
Heckshers (1995) interviews with more than 250 managers led him to
believe that participation accomplished little and rarely broke down the walls
of bureaucracy. He argued that without the redesign of work, employees
involvement and influence efforts could even have negative effects.
In organic schools the possibilities of PDM are entirely different. The
functioning of such schools depends entirely on good vertical as well as horizontal participation. Affirmative results are conditional on utilization of all
available teacher expertise. PDM is not a mere accessory; it is an integral
coordination mechanism in the organization (Koopman & Wierdsma, 1998).
In other words, because the procedures and processes are integrated with the
participative effort, teachers will experience a fit of strategies, organizing
mode, and managerial practices, which might promote school and teacher outcomes (Neumann, 1989; Sagie 1997).
Overall, schools are considered more bureaucratic than organic organizations, namely, strategic decisions may lie outside the arena of participation.
Accordingly, most educational research has indicated that teachers and principals (e.g., Rice & Schneider, 1994; Somech, 2002) concurred that as part
of the norms of school, managerial issues of school operations and administration fell outside teacher purview while technical issues of students and
instruction fell within it. In a test of relevance (Rice & Schneider, 1994),
most teachers internalized this bureaucratic perspective and evinced greater
interest in areas related to in-class issues, of immediate relevance to the
teachers own classroom, than in areas related to school as a whole (Duke &
Gansneder, 1990). So although educational administration research has long
stressed the importance of teacher participation in managerial decisions
(concerning overall policies and goals), the bureaucratic nature of schools
seems to obstruct movement in this direction (e.g., Keedy & Achilles, 1997;
Reitzug & Capper, 1996; Somech & Bogler, 2002).
193
Somech
194
195
Somech
present review is that the links between PDM and school and teacher outcomes are context specific. This approach allows us to identify the conditions
under which such effectiveness can be realized and to understand how and
why the impact of PDM varies in different contexts. This approach is especially important for educational research, which often attributes an augmentation
effect to PDM and tends to glorify the precedence of this managerial practice
over alternative practices (e.g., more directive management).
Second, by focusing on multiple outcomes, the analytical framework refines
our understanding of the distinct relationships between PDM and school and
teacher outcomes. Consistent evidence supports the notion that PDM has the
potential to contribute to school outcomes of innovation and OCB, but there
is no clear evidence as to its positive association with productivity. Regarding the relationships between PDM and teacher outcomes, the picture might
be even vaguer. Although PDM evinces a positive association with job satisfaction, the overall average size of this effect is so small as to raise concerns
about its practical significance. Moreover, initial empirical evidence points
to the potential risk of participation on teacher well-being through worsening
employees strain. This evidence may encourage researchers to explore the
potential trade-off effects between teacher health hazards and school outcomes for a better understanding of the impact of PDM in schools. Furthermore,
although we suggest that PDM affects school and teacher outcomes, most
studies employed a cross-sectional design (Wagner, 1994), therefore, the
data could not provide direct evidence of causal links between PDM and its
outcomes. Moreover, many of the relationships seem probably reciprocally
causal over time. For example, principals will arguably invite more high
innovative teachers than low ones to participate in decision making. Longitudinal studies are clearly required to explore the nature of these relationships
further. Third, the proposed analytical framework adopts a multilevel perspective for PDM by opening the inquiry to a host of moderators embedded
on the individual, dyadic, organizational, and environmental levels. The
specified moderators here are only examples of the influence that variables
may exert on the relation of PDM to school and teacher outcomes. Future
research should extend the inquiry to other moderators, embedded in different levels of the context (Golden & Veiga, 2005). Collectively, theory has
matured to a point where it makes little sense to advance hypotheses that suggest PDM is effective (or the reverse). But we must also avoid stopping at
the simple truism so often heard: Effective managerial practice depends on
the situation. We must specify what these precise contingencies are and
design creative and innovative research studies that will advance our understanding of the complex phenomenon of PDM (Vroom & Jago, 1998).
196
197
Somech
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.
198
References
Ardichvili, A. (2001). Leadership styles and work-related values of managers and
employees of manufacturing enterprises in post-communist countries. Human
Resource Development Quarterly, 12, 363-383.
Armstrong, H. D. (2004). Agency fragmentation: The dilemma facing participative
management school principals. Journal of Educational Thought, 38, 3-17.
Aryee, S., & Chen, Z. X. (2006). Leader-member exchange in a Chinese context:
Antecedents, the mediating role of psychological empowerment and outcomes.
Journal of Business Research, 59, 793-801.
Avolio, B. J., Zhu, W., Koh, W., & Bhatia, P. (2004). Transformational leadership
and organizational commitment: Mediating role of psychological empowerment
and moderating role of structural distance. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
25, 951-968.
Bacharach, S. B., Bamberger, P., Conley, S. C., & Bauer, S. (1990). The dimensionality of decision participation in educational organization: The value of a
multi-domain evaluative approach. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26,
126-167.
Barrick, M. R., Mount, M. K., & Judge, T. A. (2001). Personality and performance
at the beginning of the new millennium: What do we know and where do we go
next? International Journal of Selection & Assessment, 9, 9-30.
Benoliel, P. (2007). The positive and negative impacts of participative management: The role of personality factors (Big Five) as a moderator in the relationship between participative management and performance, satisfaction and strain
among teachers. Haifa, Israel: University of Haifa.
Berger, C. R., & Calabrese, R. J. (1975). Some explorations in initial interaction and
beyond: Toward a developmental theory of interpersonal communication. Human
Communication Research, 1, 99-112.
Blase, J., & Blase, J. (1996). Facilitative school leadership and teacher empowerment:
Teachers perspective. Social Psychology of Education, 1, 117-145.
Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2004). Influence of teacher empowerment on teacher organizational commitment, professional commitment and organizational citizenship
behavior in schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 277-289.
Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2005). Organizational citizenship behavior in school: How
does it relate to participation in decision-making? Journal of Educational Administration, 43, 420-438.
Boyle, R., Boyle, T., & Brown, M. (1999, April). Commonalities between perceptions
and practice in models of school decision-making systems in secondary schools
in England and Wales. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
199
Somech
Brouillette, L. (1997). Who defines democratic leadership? Three high school principals respond to site-based reforms. Journal of School Leadership, 7, 569-591.
Bryk, A., Camburn, E., & Louis, K. S. (1999). Professional community in Chicago
elementary schools: Facilitating factors and organizational consequences. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 751-781.
Bryk, A. S., Easton, J. Q., Kerbow, D., Rollow, S. G., & Sebring, P. A. (1993). A
view from the elementary schools: The state of Chicago school reform. Chicago:
University of Chicago, Consortium for Chicago School Research.
Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Tannenbaum, S. I., Salas, E., & Volpe, C. E. (1995). Defining
team competencies and establishing team training requirements. In R. Guzzo &
E. Salas (Eds.), Teams: Their training and performance (pp. 101-124). Norwood,
NJ: Ablex.
Carless, S. A. (2004). Does psychological empowerment mediate the relationship
between psychological climate and job satisfaction? Journal of Business and Psychology, 18, 405-425.
Carson, A. D., & Lowman, R. L. (2002). Individual-level variables in organization
consultation: A comprehensive guide to theory, skills, and techniques. Handbook
of organizational consulting psychology (pp. 5-26). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chen, Y. F., & Tjosvold, D. (2006). Participative leadership by American and Chinese
managers in China: The role of relationships. Journal of Management Studies, 43,
1727-1752.
Coch, L., & French, J. (1948). Overcoming resistance to change. Human Relations,
1, 512-532.
Cogliser, C. C., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2000). Exploring work unit context and leadermember exchange: A multi-level perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 487-511.
Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on
learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128-152.
Cole, M., Schaninger, W. S., & Harris, S. G. (2002). The workplace social exchange
network: A multilevel, conceptual examination. Group and Organization Management, 27, 142-167.
Conley, S. C., & Bacharach, S.B. (1990). From school-site management to participatory school-site management. Phi Delta Kappan, 71, 539-544.
Conley, S. C., Schmidle, T., & Shedd, J.B. (1988). Teacher participation in the management of school systems. Teachers College Record, 90, 259-280.
Conway, J. (1984). The myth, mystery, and mastery of participative decision making
in education. Educational Administrative Quarterly, 20, 11-40.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEOPI-R) and NEO Five-Factor (NEO-FFI) Inventory professional manual. Odessa,
FL: PAR.
200
Cotton, J. L., Vollrath, D. A., Froggatt, K. L., Lengnick-Hall, M. L., & Jennings, K. R.
(1988). Employee participation: Diverse forms and different outcomes. Academy
of Management Review, 13, 8-22.
Dachler, H. P., & Wilpert, B. (1978). Conceptual dimensions and boundaries of participation in organizations: A critical evaluation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 1-39.
De Dreu, C. K. W. (2006). When too little or too much hurts: Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between task conflict and innovation in teams. Journal of
Management, 32, 83-107.
De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. (2001). Minority dissent and team innovation: The
importance of participation in decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology,
68, 1191-1201.
Dimmock, C., & Walker, A. (1998). Comparative educational administration: Developing a cross-cultural conceptual framework. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34, 558-595.
DiPaola, M. F., & Hoy, W. K. (2005). School characteristics that foster organizational
citizenship behavior. Journal of School Leadership, 15, 308-326.
Drach-Zahavy, A., Somech, A., Granot, M., & Spitzer, A. (2004). Can we win them
all? Benefits and costs of structured and flexible innovation-implementations.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 217-234.
Duke, D. L., & Gansneder, B. (1990). Teacher empowerment: The view from the classroom. Educational Policy, 4, 145-160.
Durham, C. C., Knight, D., & Locke, E. A. (1997). Effects of leader role, team-set
goal difficulty, efficacy, and tactics on team effectiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 72, 203-231.
Dwyer, D. J., & Fox, M. L. (2000). The moderating role of hostility in the relationship between enriched jobs and health. Academy of Management Journal, 43,
1086-1096.
Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams.
Administrative Science, 44, 350-383.
Erez, M., & Somech, A. (1996). Is group productivity loss the rule or the exception?
Effects of culture and group-based motivation. Academy of Management Journal,
39, 1513-1537.
Evers, C. W. (1990). Schooling, organizational learning and efficiency in the growth
of knowledge. In J. Chapman (Ed.), School-based decision-making and management (pp. 55-70). London: Falmer.
Ferris, G. R., & Judge, T. A. (1991). Personnel/human resources management: A
political influence perspective. Journal of Management, 17, 447-488.
Firestone, W. A., & Pennell, J. R. (1993). Teacher commitment, working conditions,
and differential incentive policies. Review of Educational Research, 63, 489-525.
201
Somech
Fishbein, M., & Azjen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fisher, C. D. (2003). Why do lay people believe that satisfaction and performance are
correlated? Possible sources of a commonsense theory. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 24, 753-777.
French, J. R. P., Caplan, R. D., & Van Harrison, R. (1982). The mechanisms of job
stress and strain. New York: John Wiley
Fullan, M. G. (1997). Change forces. London: Falmer.
Gebert, D., Boerner, S., & Lanwehr, R. (2003). The risks of autonomy: Empirical
evidence for the necessity of a balanced management in promoting organizational
innovativeness. Creativity and Innovation Management, 12, 41-49.
Gelfand, M. J., Bhawuk, D. P. S., Nishi, L. H., & Bechtold, D. (2004). Individualism and collectivism: Multilevel perspectives and implications for leadership. In
R. J. House, P. J. Hanges, M. Javidan, P. W. Dorfman, & V. Gupta (Eds.), Culture,
leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 cultures (pp. 437-512).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gellatly, I. R. (1996). Conscientiousness and task performance: Test of a cognitive
process model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 474-482.
George, J. M., & Jones, G. R. (1997). Organizational spontaneity in context. Human
Performance, 10, 153-170.
Gerstner, C. R., & Day, D. V. (1994). Cross-cultural comparison of leadership prototypes. Leadership Quarterly, 5, 121-134.
Goldberg, L. R. (1992). The development of markers for the Big Five factor structure.
Psychological Assessment, 4, 26-42.
Golden, T. D., & Veiga, J. F. (2005). Spanning boundaries and borders: Toward understanding the cultural dimensions of team boundary spanning. Journal of Managerial Issues, 17, 178-193.
Griffin, G. A. (1995). Influence of shared decision making on school and classroom
activity: Conversations with five teachers. Elementary School Journal, 96, 29-45.
Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.),
Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration
(pp. 653-696). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
Gunthert, K. C., Cohen, L. H., & Armeli, S. (1999). The role of neuroticism in daily
stress and coping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1087-1100.
Guzzo, R. A. (1996). Fundamental considerations about work groups. In M. A. West
(Ed.), Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 3-24). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Hackman, J. R. (1992). The psychology of self-management in organizations. In
R. Glaser (Ed.), Classic readings in self-managing teamwork: 20 of the most
important articles (pp. 143-193). King of Prussia, PA: Organization Design and
Development.
202
Haimovich, A. (2006). Positive and negative effects of participation in decision making on teachers well-being, health and productivity. Haifa, Israel: University of
Haifa.
Hallinger, P., & Leithwood, K. (1996). Culture and educational administration: A
case of finding out what you dont know. Journal of Educational Administration,
34, 98-116.
Harris, M. M., & van Tassell, F. (2005). The professional development school as
learning organization. European Journal of Teacher Education, 28, 179-194.
Hecksher, C. (1995). White collar blues. Management loyalties in an age of corporate
restructuring. New York: Basic Books.
Heler, F., Pusic, E., Strauss, G., & Wilpert, B. (1998). Organizational participation:
Myth and reality. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Hoy, W. K., & Trater, C. J. (1993). A normative theory of participative decision making in schools. Journal of Educational Administration, 31, 4-19.
Jarvis, M. (2002). Teacher stress: A critical review of recent finding and suggestions
for future research direction. Stress News. Retrieved from http://www.isma.org./
uk/stressnw/teachstress1.htm
Johnson, W. R. (1992). The impact of quality circle participation on job satisfaction and
organizational commitment. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 29, 1-11.
Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and
job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530-541.
Jung, D. J., & Avolio, B. J. (1999). Effects of leadership style and followers cultural
orientation on performance in group and individual task conditions. Academy of
Management Journal, 42, 208-218.
Kahai, S., Sosik, J., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Effects of leadership style and problem
structure on work group process and outcomes in an electronic meeting system
environment. Personnel Psychology, 50, 121-146.
Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain: Implications for job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285-309.
Keedy, J. L., & Achilles, C. M. (1997). The need for school-constructed theories in
practice in US school restructuring. Journal of Educational Administration, 35,
102-121.
Kemmelmeier, M., Burnstein, E., Krumov, K., Genkova, P., Kanagawa, C.,
Hirshberg, M., et al. (2003). Individualism, collectivism and authoritarianism
in seven societies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 304-322.
Kim, S. (2002). Participative management and job satisfaction: Lessons for management leadership. Public Administration Review, 62, 231-241.
Koka, B. R., Madhavan, R., & Prescott, J. E. (2006). The evaluation of interfirm
networks: Environmental effects on patterns of network change. Academy of Management Review, 31, 721-737.
203
Somech
204
205
Somech
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, C. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resourcedependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B., & Bacharach, D. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, 513-563.
Pounder, D. G. (1997). Teacher teams: Promoting teacher involvement and leadership in secondary schools. High School Journal, 80, 117-124.
Probst, T. M. (2005). Countering the negative effects of job insecurity through participative decision making: Lessons from the demand-control model. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 10, 320-329.
Quick, J. C., & Quick, J. D. (2004). Healthy, happy, productive worker: A leadership
challenge. Organizational Dynamics, 33, 329-337.
Ray, T., Clegg, S., & Gordon, R. (2004). A new look at dispread leadership: Power,
knowledge and context. In L. Storey (Ed.), Leadership in organizations: Current
issues and key trends (pp. 319-336). London: Routledge.
Reitzug, U. C., & Capper, C. A. (1996). Deconstructing site-based management: Possibilities for emancipation and alternative means of control. International Journal
of Educational Reform, 5, 56-77.
Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of
the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 698-714.
Rice, E. M., & Schneider, G. T. (1994). A decade of teacher empowerment: An
empirical analysis of teacher involvement in decision making, 1980-1991. Journal
of Educational Administration, 32, 43-58.
Sagie, A. (1997). Leader direction and employee participation in decision making: Contradictory or compatible practices? Applied Psychology: An International Review,
46, 387-452.
Sagie, A., & Aycan, Z. (2003). A cross-cultural analysis of participative decision
making in organizations. Human Relations, 56, 453-473.
Sagie, A., Zaidman, N., Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Teeni, D., & Schwartz, D. G.
(2002). An empirical assessment of the loose-tight leadership model: Quantitative
and qualitative analyses. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 303-320.
Sak, U. (2004). A synthesis of research on psychological types of gifted adolescents.
Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 15, 70-79.
San Antonio, D. M., & Gamage, D. T. (2007). Building trust among educational
stakeholders through participatory school administration. Leadership and management. British Educational Leadership. Management & Administration Society,
21, 15-22.
Sato, M., Hyler, M. E., & Monte-Sano, C. (2002, April). The National Board Certification process and its impact on teacher leadership. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
206
Schaubroeck, J., & Ganster, D. C. (1991). Beyond the call to duty: A field study of
extra-role behavior in voluntary organization. Human Relations, 44, 569-582.
Schmitt, N., Cortina, J. M., Ingerick, M. J., & Weichmann, D. (2003). Personnel selection and employee performance. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, R. J. Klimoski, &
I. B. Weiner (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol.12. Industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 77-105). New York: John Wiley.
Scott-Ladd, B., Travaglione, A., & Marshall, V. (2006). Causal inferences between
participation in decision making, task attributes, work effort, rewards, job satisfaction and commitment. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 27,
399-414.
Scully, J. A., Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1995). Locus of knowledge as a
determinant of the effect of participation on performance, affect, and perceptions.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 61, 276-288.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
Senge, P. M. (1993). Transforming the practice of management. Human Resource
Development Quarterly, 4, 5-32.
Short, P. M., & Greer, J. T. (1997). Leadership in empowered schools: Themes from
innovative efforts. Columbus, OH: Merrill Publishing.
Short, P. M., Greer, J. T., & Melvin, W. M. (1994). Creating empowered schools:
Lessons in change. Journal of Educational Research, 32, 38-52.
Slate, R. N., & Vogel, R. E. (1997). Participative management and correctional
personnel: A study of the perceived atmosphere for participation in correctional
decision making and its impact on employee stress and thoughts about quitting.
Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 397-408.
Smylie, M. A. (1992). Teacher participation in school decision making: Assessing willingness to participate. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14,
53-67.
Smylie, M. A., Lazarus, V., & Brownlee-Conyers, J. (1996). Instrumental outcomes
of school-based participative decision making. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, 18, 181-191.
Somech, A. (2002). Explicating the complexity of participative management: An
investigation of multiple dimensions. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38,
341-371.
Somech, A. (2003). Relationships of participative leadership with relational demography variables: A multi-level perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
24, 1003-1018.
Somech, A. (2005). Directive versus participative leadership: Two complementary
approaches to managing school effectiveness. Educational Leadership Quarterly,
39, 1-24.
207
Somech
Somech, A. (2006). Women as participative leaders: Understanding participative leadership from a cross-cultural perspective. In I. Oplatka & R. Hertz-Lazarowitz (Eds.),
Women principals in a multicultural society (pp. 155-74). Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense
Publishers.
Somech, A., & Bogler, R. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of teacher organizational and professional commitment. Educational Administration Quarterly,
38, 555-577.
Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2000). Understanding extra-role behavior in
schools: The relationships between job satisfaction, sense of efficacy, and teacher
extra-role behavior. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 649-659.
Somech, A., & Wenderow, M. (2006). The impact of participative and directive leadership on teacher performance: The intervening effects of job structuring, decision
domain, and LMX. Educational Administrative Quarterly, 42, 746-772.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the work place: Dimensions,
measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1442-1465.
Spreitzer, G. M. (2007). Toward the integration of two perspectives: A review of socialstructural and psychological empowerment at work. In C. Cooper & J. Barling
(Eds.), The handbook of organizational behavior (pp. 1-41). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Suls, J. (2001). Affect, stress and personality. In J. P. Forgas (Ed.), Handbook of
affect and social cognition (pp. 392-409). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Sutton, R. I., & Kahn, R. L. (1987). Prediction, understanding, and control as antidotes to organizational stress. In J. W. Lorsch (Ed.), Handbook of organizational
behavior (pp. 272-285). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Szymura, B., & Wodniecka, Z. (2003). What really bothers neurotics? In search for
factors impairing attentional performance. Personality and Individual Differences,
34, 109-126.
Taris, T. W. (2006). Is there a relationship between burnout and objective performance? A critical review of 16 studies. Work & Stress, 20, 316-334.
Taylor, D. L., & Tashakkori, A. (1997). Toward an understanding of teachers desire
for participation in decision making. Journal of School Leadership, 7, 609-628.
Tepper, B. J., & Taylor, E. C. (2003). Relationships among supervisors and subordinates procedural justice perceptions and organizational citizenship behaviors.
Academy of Management Journal, 46, 97-105.
Tett, R. P., & Burnett, D. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist model of
job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 500-517.
Thoms, P., Pinto, J. K., Parente, D. H., & Druskat, V. U. (2002). Adaptation to selfmanaging work teams. Small Group Research, 33, 3-31.
Torres, C. V. (2000). Leadership style norms among Americans and Brazilians: Assessing differences using Jacksons return potential model. Dissertation Abstracts
International: The Sciences and Engineering, 60, 4284.
208
209
Somech
Bio
Anit Somech is the head of Educational Leadership Program at the University of
Haifa, Israel. Her current research interests include participative leadership, team
work, and organizational citizenship behavior at the individual, team, and organizational levels. http://www.edu.haifa.ac.il/personal/asomech/index.htm