'Invitational Leadership Essay\r'

'Introduction\r\n leading, and the correction of it, has its commencement in the premature civilizations. antiquated rulers, pharaohs, emperors and biblical patriarchs have whizz thing in common †attr representership. Although scholars have been analyse this phenomenon for near two centuries, numerous definitions and theories split by dint of turn out. However, enough similarities exist so as to define â€Å" leading” as an lying-in of influence and the tycoon to induce residence (Wren, 1995). lead is a suffice through and through which an soul influences others to accomplish an objective and directs the formation in a way that makes it much(prenominal) cohesive and coherent. This definition of lead is comparatively similar to that of Northo accustom’s (2007,p.3) And the definition of a draw stipulated by Peter Drucker is somebody who has chase. The capacity to influence others is dependent on the power detained.\r\nThe attractor’s attitudes would unquestionably determine the level of productivity from his employees. A Task Orientation or directive Behaviour reflects the concern of a attracter for the actual task at tidy sum whereas Employee Orientation or Supportive Behaviours reflects how lots a attracter is concerned for the state around him, providing concord and encouragement for them. Concurrently, incompatible theories have been developed for the field of lead but we would be showing much attention to the invitational drawing cardship guess. The research on the effects of invitational precept Theory (IET) in the learningal administrative dealance is comparatively new(a) as comp atomic number 18d to other theories pertaining to leading.\r\ninvitational lead has a divergent dimension from the standard theories of leading that emphasized the impact of influencing others through the use of power to an alternative leaders musical sense modality that promotes collaboration and show cons ideration and look upon for respective(prenominal)s in the readingal dodging. This study lie ins of two parts. Firstly, we would see the theoretical introduction of the invitational leadership, followed a brief comparison of the theory with other leadership theories possessing more(prenominal) or less the same characteristics and fin each(prenominal)y, in what ways the invitational leadership is more sufficient to the gentilityal community. Secondly, we would focus on what the invitational style provides in response to the demands of the civili minuteime sector. Besides, we would see to what extent the invitational leadership is applied to my profession through ex angstrom unitles dis attribute from my past experiences.\r\nâ€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€-\r\n1. Theoretical part\r\ninvitational Theory\r\nPurkey (1992, p.5) defines invitational Leadership asa theory which â€Å"is a collection of premisss that seek t o inform phenomena and provide a mean of object al unrivaled in individu completelyy(prenominal)y summoning volume to realise their relatively boundless latent in all aras of worthwhile gaykind endeavour” Invitational Theory is a mode of paid practice that summons the environment and all births formed in educational and human service organizations. It is a process for communication caring and appropriate mental object mean to tempt forth the realisation of human potential. It is also a way for identifying and ever-changing those institutional and relational forces that defeat and unload potential.\r\nCommunication is vital for all sociable relationships or integration. shallows, as a friendly institution, send out complex capacity systems that continuously inform sight of their worth, mogul, and power to direct themselves. The sen meternt of â€Å"invitation” deduce grounds from the effort provided by those who seek to expire ideas. This inv olves shaping, moulding and changing. The sound out ask for is a derivation of the Latin word have. It probably began as vito, which means to avoid or shun. In early Roman tack together of magnitude, vito was apply to express idolize of encroachment by other tribes, and to negative their entry into Rome. As Rome became a dominant force, its citizens felt more stop and opened their b indian lodges to the world. In time, the prefix in- implication â€Å"without” or â€Å" non,” was added, and the word invite, meaning â€Å"to murder politely,” became common and developed into invite. So by definition, an invitation is a purposive and generous act by which the inviter seeks to enroll others in the deal launch forth in the invitation. From this we derive the term Invitational Leadership (Purkey & axerophthol; Siegel, 2002, p212).\r\nFrom an invitational view flow, individuals possess the characteristics of creation able, invaluable and obligated. As such, they ar to be interact accordingly. Conversely, we observe a transformation from the appellations employ: from â€Å"motivate,” â€Å"shape,” â€Å"reinforce,” â€Å"make,” â€Å"enhance,” â€Å"build,” and â€Å"empower” people to that of â€Å"offer,” â€Å"propose,” â€Å"present,” â€Å"encourage,” â€Å"consider,” and â€Å"summon heartily.” Similarly, in the initiate context, the invitational leader is the unrivaled who summons associates to higher levels of parting and presents them with the probability to participate in the bring inion of something of common benefit.\r\nUltimately, we find that this â€Å"something” is a procedure to make out a better environment and a way to eliminate inequalities. Invitational Leadership offer a new perspective, an amour for dogmatic affable miscellanea. It acknowledges our potential, our integrity, our mutuality and our business to do beloved. Moreover, a central instalment in m whatever definitions of leadership is that thither is a process of influence. Leithwood et al (1999, p.6) differentiate that â€Å"influence … seems to be a essential part of most imaginationions of leadership.” Yulk (2002, p.) explains this influence process: â€Å"Most definitions of leadership reflect the assumption that it involves a social influence process whereby intentional influence is exerted by one mortal [or pigeonholing] over other people [or conventions] to structure the activities and relationships in a group or shaping.”\r\nYulk’s use of ‘ someone’ or ‘group’ indicates that leadership whitethorn be exercised by individuals as good as teams. Additionally, this feel is sh bed by Harris (2002) and Leithwood (2001) who both advocate distributed leadership as an alternative to customsal top-down leadership object lessons.\r\nInvitational leadersh ip as a model of influence\r\nIt finish be agreed that leadership involves influence and that it may be exercised by anyone in an organisation. In addition, Cuban (1988,p.193) points out to leadership as an influence process. â€Å"Leadership indeed refers to people who bend the ineluctably and actions of others to achieving certain goals; it implies taking initiatives and risks.” This opinion establishs that the process of influence is rivet as it is fateed to lead to specific outcomes. bring offmore, this belief is reinforced by Fidler (1997, p.25) : â€Å"followers argon influenced towards goal achievement.” Eventually, a similar concept is used by Stoll and fink (1996), that of ‘invitational’ leadership explaining how leaders function in civilizes. â€Å"Leadership is about communicating invitational messages to individuals and groups with whom leaders interact in place to build and act on a sh ard and evolving good deal of deepen educa tional experiences for pupils.” (p.109)\r\nAt this point, I agree to what Stoll and tennis shoe (1996) said; the persona of the leader, in the tutor, is to guide a crap together with his collaborators towards making the institution an inclusive discipline which provides a good education to all pupils, irrespective of their varying abilities. Further to this, communication should be at the base of operations of all determination making to add up at a consensus between the different stake expecters. As it is stated in the condition attention Manual, the Rector should â€Å"run the inform in close collaboration with the legate Rector.” The Rector or the De erecty Rector, should be open to new ideas put forward by lag or pupils. The intragroup communication (morning assembly, form period, meeting with students’ representatives, t from each oneing method staff, head of Department etc.) of the school should be an open platform where leaders bring on a conviviality atmosphere among each individuals, therefore, inviting others to get engaged in the feeler of the school.\r\nAs we have comp bed the close relationship of Invitational Leadership as being a model of influence, evenly, the Invitational Leadership Theory reflects a transformational dimension. Transformational Leadership enhanced the motivation, morale and performance of follower’s through a variety of mechanisms. These comprise connecting the follower’s sense of individuation and self-importance to the rush and the collective identity of the organization; being a authority model for followers that shakes them; challenging followers to take greater ownership for their attain, and consciousness the strength and weaknesses of followers, so the leader squeeze out align them with tasks that optimize their performance.\r\nSimilarly, the invitational leader invites the followers by communicating to them the mission and goal of the organisation and by eva luate the individual personality. As the leader himself is a role model in displaying invitational qualities, he reinforces these qualities among his/her followers. Becoming an Invitational Leader necessitates that a leader become more consciously aw atomic number 18 of his or her self and, by so doing, takes responsibility of how he or she defines that self. If we distinguish ourselves to be lacking(p) in some native leadership lumber, then assuredly we provide shop to influence others to join our cause.\r\nFurthermore, the invitational leadership enclose these servant types of determine : excellence, caring, justice, and faith. critical review of current literature substantiates the need for a pitch in leadership in order to adequately meet the involve of current educational institutions.\r\nBecoming an invitational leader\r\nâ€Å"How substructure I gain the cooperation of those in my environment so that potence and productivity increase and that our group function m ore smoothly and efficaciously?” The scarce way is by inviting, showing trust, intellectual and respect (Purkey, Siegel, 2002). Intimidation and coercion, comm alone used approaches, are not effective and ultimately pass on prove to be counter- profitable. They view that there is hardly one motivation inside humans and that is an internal produce and desire to realise one’s own potential. In short we all want to be more, to self-actualise and to put our talents to good use by committing to something beyond ourselves. This washstand only be achieved by volunteered and not by pressure. Hence, I privy substantiate the more leaders are viewed as caring, respectful and supportive, the greater their chances of emancipating the talents and energies of their associates. Those in authority must initial begin by making others feel valued if they accept to gain respect and cooperation in return.\r\nThe world-class stage toward effective leadership is a wise, rooted s ense of self. This means a commitment to find one’s own core values. The authors, Purkey & ampere; Siegel (2002) put forward that one cannot empower others without first empowering oneself. These two scholars present various ideas for cultivating all aspects of breeding from strong-arm and psychological to the unearthly and intellectual. Furthermore, the leader has to present a vision of what a successful organization looks like, to set the proper environment in order to move people to embrace the organisation’s vision and to take on the individual and collective responsibility for the successes and failures of the organization.\r\nThis would consequence in a group of self-actualizing individuals, each committed to the purpose and to one other in a supporting environment. Likewise, the school’s atmosphere should be causative enough so as to inspire people connected to the school to be committed among themselves. Like indicated initially, the leader, that is the Rector or headmaster of the school, is the one to establish the point of contact between the administration, teaching and non-teaching staff and the students, to give avenues that the personnel would follow. Consequently, the opportunity stimulaten to each individual would unleash the potential that reside in them. Similarly, each one would adopt an invitational approach as they are constantly exposed to it in their everyday situation at school.\r\nThe ability to challenge the people you lead to perform high quality will only continue over time if the leader has developed his invitational side as well. As stipulated in the School Management Manual of the Ministry of nurture, Culture & piece Resources, the Rector, as the leader â€Å"builds and accompanies his teams, providing them with the required support and motivation, listening to their views and their problems and valuing their effort, support and contribution.”\r\nWalter Bennis, one of our more dynamic thi nkers on leadership, has be a leader is one who is guided by an â€Å"exciting and specific dream and who enrols others in his or her vision.” (Purkey, Siegel; 2002) consequently, by providing support and motivation, school’s leaders enroll others by summoning them cordially to realise their potential. Furthermore, support for the importance of values was provided by Stoll and Fink (1996) in their study of leadership in education. They affirmed that successful leaders aver upon a strong set of values to guide their decision-making. We can contrast the decision-making process to the Participative Leadership which is defined by Leithwood et al. (2002) as a leadership style which â€Å"assumes that the decision-making processes of the group ought to be central focus for leaders” (p.12).\r\nInvitational Education Theory (IET)\r\nAs stated by the author of rudiments of Invitational Education, the focus of Invitational Leadership in education is on the message tra nsmitted by people, places, policies, programs, and processes (Purkey, 2008, p.7). Invitational education is based on three fundamental ideas Purkey, W.W., & Novak, J.M. (1996).: the antiauthoritarian ethos, the perceptual tradition, and self-concept theory. The republican ethos put emphasize on â€Å" look at dialogue and uncouth respect as people work together to prepare the character, practices and institutions that promote a fulfilling shared life.”(p.9) In this democratic style of leadership, it implies that whoever is concerned or affected by decisions should have a say in those decisions. The perceptual tradition states that events are always seen through the individual and cultural filters people use. Thus an great aspect of the inviting approach is to understand and authorize the meaningfulness of people’s perceptions and to work with these perceptions to design shared purposes.(p.10)\r\nSelf-concept is the image people construct of who they are and how they fit in the world. â€Å"This system of personal beliefs is maintained, protected and by the choices the individual makes.” (p.10). Invitational education is a mode of functioning by which people are cordially, creatively and consistently summoned to realise their potential. As mentioned earlier, its focus is on the messages transmitted. However, the messages that are exchange are never on electroneutral basis as they carry autocratic or negative, inviting or disinviting connotation.\r\nThere are quatern fundamental values, what we call principles, which give Invitational Leaders bearing and purpose. Together, these quaternity principles form a basic set of guiding beliefs. These are respect, trust, optimism, and intentionality. Therefore the four principles take the form of propositions that offer a perspective for speech communicationing, evaluation and modifying the total school environment. Purkey, W. W.& Novak, J. M.; (2008) testify that this standpoi nt allows Rectors or educators to assume an â€Å"inviting stance,” which is a focused frame-work for preserve action.\r\n assess\r\nPeople are valuable, able, and accountable and should be treated accordingly. Respect is an measurable aspect in Invitational Leadership. It provides a new vision based on the process of summoning people cordially to move in more democratic, creative, and fur-bearing directions through non-coercive means. A democratic society emphasizes the inherent worth of all people, believes in their self-directing power, and stressed the importance of personal and social accountability. Invitational schools do the same. Purkey, W. W.& Novak, J. M. (2008) stipulates that responsibilities that are shared based on mutual respect and expectations of supreme outcomes results in a cooperative relationship that recognizes each â€Å"person’s ability to accept, reject, negotiate, or hold in abeyance the messages sent to them.” (p.12)\r\nRespe ct is demonstrated in courteous deportments as civility, politeness and common courtesy. Waterman and Peters (1988), in their book In appear of Excellence, account that a special characteristic of extremely successful companies is the courteous and respectful behaviours of their employees. They are â€Å"good listeners, pay attention to their customers, are courteous and treat people as adults. Respect is one of eight major characteristics that distinguish excellent companies.”\r\nSumming up, respect is consequential in Invitational Leadership because it is the quality that enables leaders to be a undecomposed presence that has the ability to take a respectful stance toward colleagues †literally inviting others into a mutually beneficial relationship.\r\nTrust\r\nEducation is a cooperative, collaborative activity.\r\nInvitational education is based on the fundamental interdependence of human beings. To establish trustworthy pattern, time and effort are infallible . Trustworthy patterns of fundamental interaction depend on people who demonstrate the following quality: reliability, genuineness, truthfulness, intent and competence.\r\n objective\r\nThe process is the product of making.\r\nA decision to purposely act in a certain way, to achieve and carry out a set of goals (Day et.al, 2001, p.34). Is defined as knowing what we intend to bring about as well as how we intend it to happen gives clarity and direction to our work (Stillion and Siegel, 2OO5, p15).\r\nOptimism\r\nPeople possess untapped potential in all areas of humans endeavour.\r\nInvitational educators are committed to the continuous judgment and growth of all involved in the educative process (Day et. al, 2001, p. 34).\r\nâ€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€-\r\n2. Invitational Leadership in practice in the educational community\r\nThe focus of this study is to visualize the invitational leadership style to hold if it provides the nec essary skills needed in at present’s educational organisations. In response to the increased need for excellent trouble and guidance, many leadership models have been intend and implemented to meet the demanding needs of the educational sector. Following this emptiness in the educational community, the invitational leadership was introduced in 2002 by Purkey and Siegel. Stillion and Siegel (2005) summed up the idea behind this new leadership style, â€Å"Purkey … having studied human behaviour for four decades, proposed that leaders must take an invitational stance in transaction with others and in developing themselves” (p.4) According to Purkey and Novak (1996), IET is a model of practice: it adopts a overbearing approach in the educational training and it provides policies and strategies for making schools more inviting.\r\nMajor challenges that the school staff usually face on daily basis are issues pertaining to the students’ welfare such as ind iscipline, From my observation at school, lack of guidance and clarified direction has served as a tremendous decrease of energy, time, effort and resource. It would prove difficult to set apart authority to individuals or self-managed groups when â€Å"followers do not trust each other, because they will not share information or cooperate in trying to crop mutual problems” (Yulk, 2002,p.109). The lack of invitational characteristics in a leader would slow the effective pace of work. An effective leader will work to bring about positive and long lasting change, when change is necessary within organisation. By doing so, he would invite staff into collaboration, will work conservatively to bring about change in a way that the school’s member will not only be involved but would be pleased with the eventual outcome of the change. Schein (2000) discussed, â€Å"change programs fail because they do not take into consideration the underlying socialisation.”\r\nIn order for an organisation to survive, it is imperative that strong and levelheaded relationships are formed. Likewise, these carefully formed relationships can help to formulate a refining of acceptance and desire to achieve excellence. Schein (1996) defined socialisation as the â€Å"set of shared, taken-for-granted covert assumptions that a group holds and that determines how it perceives, think about, and counterbalance to its various environments” (p.236). At the school, the Rector is a vital component in creating the culture. However, the administrators’ role in understanding that culture is equally essential. This creates a sense of ownership and a shared leadership.\r\nRespect and trust thus serve as a autochthonic component of an organisation’s goodish culture. To illustrate this idea, it is important that the Rector, educators and administrators understand what takes place within the school. Invitational Leadership argued that leader cannot crea te a climate of empowerment and participation if the underlying belief of culture is that everyone must do whatever the oldtimer says they should do. I firmly agree that leadership through coercion and fear is not effective when attempting to create a productive team. Additionally, as stipulated by Purkey & Siegel (2002), messages communicate to people which inform them that they are able, responsible and worthwhile.\r\nThese messages should be made accessible to every person in the school, conveying the intention of the leaders, so making everyone part of the institution. These messages are corresponded though â€Å"inter-personal action, but also through institutional policies, programmes, practices and physical environments” (Day et al., 2001, p.34). Furthermore, Purkey and Siegel (2003) postulate a specific framework by which schools can become â€Å"invitational” by concentrating on the phoebe bird areas contributing to success and failures. apiece one of these elements contributes to the creation of a positive school climate and ultimately a healthy and successful organisation.\r\nThe Starfish similitude by Purkey\r\nInvitational leadership focusses on five areas which contribute to the success or failure of individuals. Purkey refers to it as the Starfish analogy: The sea star lives to eat garners. To defend itself, the gather has two stout shells that fasten tightly together and held in place by a powerful muscle. The starfish finds the oyster and places itself on top of its intended victim. Gradually, gently, and firmly the starfish uses each of its five points in turn to keep pressure on the oyster’s one muscle. season one point works, the other four rest. The single oyster muscle, while incredibly powerful, gets no rest. Inevitably, and irresistibly, the oyster is opened and the starfish has its meal. By constant, steady pressure from a number of points, even the strongest muscle (and the biggest challenge) can b e overcome.\r\nThese five areas â€Å"exist in practically every environment” and serve as a means to invite others professionally (Purkey, 1992, p.7) 1. People †Purkey (1992) affirmed that â€Å" zippo is more important in life than people. It is the people who create a respectful, optimistic5 visibility. 2. Places †refers to physical environment of an organisation. It has been suggested that places are the easiest of the five areas to change due to their visibility. 3. Policies- â€Å"policies refer to the procedures, codes, rules, written or unwritten, used to regulate the on-going functions of individuals and organizations” (Purkey, 1992,p.7) 4. Programs †play an important role in invitational leadership â€Å"because programs often focus on narrow objectives that neglect the wider scope of human needs’ (Purkey, 1002, p.7) 5. Processes †The â€Å"how something is accomplished” (Purkey & Siegel, 2003, p.125). It can be defined as the way that people, places, policies and programs are evident in schools.\r\nPurkey and Siegel (2003) refer to these five areas as a means to invite others professionally. They affirmed that â€Å"the combination of these five areas offers an almost limitless number of opportunities for the Invitational Leader, for they address the total culture … of almost any organisation” (p.104)\r\nConclusion\r\nThis study was to ask in what ways and to what degree, if any, an invitational leader impacts the overall effectiveness of the school setting. We focused in the first part on leadership qualities and characteristics which lead to success. We arrived at a common consensus that invitational leadership characteristics do influence the development of successful organizations.\r\nThe invitational leadership model seeks to invite all interested stakeholders to succeed. As noted by Day, Harris, and Hadfield (2001) invitations are â€Å"messages communicated to people which i nform then that they are able, responsible and worthwhile” (p.34)\r\nTo conclude, it is believed that the invitational leadership model should serve as a practice to emulate in order to achieve positive results in effective leadership in schools. The active agent use of invitational leadership was proved to be a leadership model that should be considered effective when trying to create a healthy, positive and successful organization.\r\nâ€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€-\r\nReferences\r\n1. Asbill, K. (1994). Invitational leadership: Teacher perceptions of inviting principal practices. unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Educational Management, raw Mexico State University.\r\n2. Day, C., Harris, A., & Hadfield, M. (2001). Grounding cognition of Schools in Stakeholder Realities: A Multi-Perspective Study of stiff School Leaders. School Leadership & Management, 21(1), 19-42.\r\n3. Peters, Tom J. & Waterman, Robert H. (1988), In Search of Excellence †Lessons from America’s Best-Run Companies, HarperCollins Publishers, London.\r\n4. Purkey, W. W & Siegel, B.L (2002). Becoming an Invitational Leader. Atlanta, USA. Brumby Holdings, Inc.\r\n5. Purkey, W. W.& Novak, J. M. (2008). Fundamentals of Invitational Education. Kennesaw, Georgia: world-wide Alliance for Invitational Education.\r\n6. Purkey, W. W., & Novak, J. M. (1996). Inviting school success: A self-concept approach to teaching, learning, and democratic practice (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.\r\n7. Purkey, W., & Schmidt, J. (1990). Invitational learning for counseling and development. Ann Arbor, MI: ERIC Counseling and Personnel Services Clearinghouse.\r\n8. School Leadership: Concepts and Evidence; Full constitution/Spring 2003. National College for School Leadership: http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/5119/2/dok217-eng-chool_Leadership_Concepts_and_Evidence.pdf\r\n9. Schein, E. H. (1996). C ulture: The missing concept in organization studies. Administrative attainment Quarterly, 41, 229-240.\r\n10. Schein, E. H. (2000). Sense and nonsense about culture and climate. In N. M. Ashkanasy, C. P. M. Wilderom, & M. F. Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of organizational Culture & Climate (pp. xxiii-xxx). molar concentration Oaks, Ca: Sage Publications\r\n11. Stanley, P.H. A Bibliography For Invitational Theory and Practice. RadfordUniversity; http://www.invitationaleducation.net/journal/v11p52.htm\r\n12. Stillion, J., & Siegel, B. (November, 2005). Expanding Invitational Leadership: Roles for the Decathlon Leader. Retrieved January 31, 2006, from http://www.kennesaw.edu/ilec/Journal/articles/2005/siegel_stillion/expand_leadership/exp…\r\n13. Wren, J. T. (1995). The leaders’ fella: Insights on leadership through the ages. overbold York: The Free Press.\r\n14. Yukl, G. A. (2002) Leadership in Organizations, fifth part Edition, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prenti ce-Hall.\r\n'