Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to present a leadership framework for school leaders in a time of permacrisis. The framework is intended to capture the key leadership practices and capabilities that will support leaders to succeed and seize opportunities when faced with multiple, overlapping and interconnected crises. This proposal reflects the conference theme of ‘Charting the Way Forword’ in a time uncertainty.

Conceptual Framework

Background to the proposal

In 2017 we published an article about leadership in a world of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA) that was presented at ECER in Hamburg (2018) (Drysdale & Gurr, 2017). We argued that despite the many writers who advocated that leaders need to re-invent themselves in times of change, we presented a ‘Leadership Domains and Capabilities Framework’ that showed the leadership practices or domains that were likely to remain constant no matter what the situation, whereas the capabilities that underpinned these practices can change. We updated this with an article that included lessons from the pandemic (Gurr & Drysdale, 2020). In this proposal we further update our leadership framework and explore new capabilities that are required in a time of permacrisis.

Permacrisis

While the term "permacrisis" first appeared in academic contexts in the 1970s (Cohen & Goldfinger,1975), and the word gained significant attention in 2022 when it was named Collins Dictionary's Word of the Year. The term remains relevant and widely used, encapsulating the feeling of living through a period marked by multiple, overlapping crises. It is defined as "an extended period of instability and insecurity, especially one resulting from a series of catastrophic events" (Collins Dictionary). Usually, it applies to the current global situation that includes economic challenges, geopolitical tensions, environmental issues, health crisis, political instability, and ongoing global crises where we move from one crisis to another without resolution. In Permacrisis: A plan to fix a fractured world, Brown et al. (2023) explore the interconnected challenges facing the world and argues we are in an era of continuous and overlapping crises. By analysing the issues, the authors propose a plan to navigate the challenges and build a more stable future.

 While permacrisis mostly refers to the global events like pandemics and wars, school education is also experiencing its own version of permacrisis in Europe and other Western countries. Examples include teacher shortages and burnout, funding and resource constraints, curriculum and assessment challenges, mental health and well-being, and the digital divide. These challenges are interconnected. For example, teacher shortages are exacerbated by funding constraints, increased workload, post pandemic teacher well-being issues, resilience challenges, and inequality of resourcing. Addressing these issues requires a multifaceted approach compared with the past.

 We argue that far from a feeling of hopeless due to being overwhelmed and powerless there are opportunities for leaders to work towards solutions that address the root causes and build resilience for the future (again following the ECER conference theme).

 The seven domains we identified previously remain: understanding the context, setting direction, developing the organisation, developing people, improving teaching and learning, influencing, and leading self (Drysdale & Gurr, 2017). In an era of permacrisis we argue that what is needed is a change of mindset and a recalibration for each domain. This is because educational leaders are faced with an unending onslaught of disruption both inside and outside their schools with risks that often exceed the traditional scope of their roles. This will require new capabilities.

 In the presentation we present the new findings on redefining the domains and identifying new capabilities that underpin the domains.

The proposal builds on our previous research and attempts to re-conceptualise our ‘Leadership Domains and Capabilities Framework’ to meet the new challenge of permacrisis. The methodology is a combination of conceptual ideas, review of educational literature on school leadership, business administration literature, and our own research findings and observations. Our major source of research draws on the findings of our colleagues in the International Successful Schools Principals Project (ISSPP). The ISSPP is an international collaborative research network of academics representing 18 countries and 21 universities. The work is widely published in several edited books, special issue journals and numerous individual papers. Four of the practices are key ideas for leadership that have been explored, developed and championed in Leithwood’s research and collaborations over the past two decades and which include setting direction, developing people, redesigning the organisation and improving the instructional program (e.g. Leithwood, Harris & Hopkins, 2020; Leithwood & Riehl, 2005; Leithwood & Sun 2012). The ISSPP research findings confirmed that these were important attributes of successful principals (Day & Leithwood 2007). Within this project these ideas have been used as a conceptual framework in many of the case studies for identifying successful leadership practices (e.g. Ylimaki & Jacobson 2011). They can also be observed in many of the cases such as those contained in an edited collection of cases (e.g. Day & Gurr 2014, 2024). Based on our research within the ISSPP and our wider research, we have modified these four ideas to become setting direction, developing people, leading change and leading teaching and learning and well being. We have added three additional areas that help promote school success. Leaders understand that ultimately, they are responsible for their own professional development. They are proactive in their development and restless for new ideas. They also understand that leadership is about influencing the behaviours of others in a deliberate process that leads to behaviour change. Finally, they understand the multiple contexts in which their school exists, and they can respond to, and influence, these contexts. They become a storyteller and sense maker to help others understand the place of a school in a complicated set of contexts. In our framework we identify 18 capabilities from our research and literature review that support each domain. The new framework reflects the new challenges of permacrisis that includes continuous and overlapping disruption and crisis that require new capabilities.

In the proposal we present the new ‘Leadership Domains and Capabilities Framework’ for leadership in permacrisis. The framework is drawn as three circles. We place student learning as the centre circle. In the middle circle are the seven domains that leaders will use to support student learning. In the outer circle in support of each domain, we identify new capabilities. We compare the old and new frameworks to show how the capabilities have changed. Some capabilities remain important but there are several new capabilities. We have re-calibrating the domains for new times. Examples of the findings: All permacrises require expertise in change management. Educational leaders cannot rely on classical change management models that were developed to address a particular event, not a series of overlapping crises. In the domain of 'understanding the context', educational leaders are faced with an unending onslaught of disruption both inside and outside their schools with risks that often beyond the traditional scope of their roles. Social and environmental issues, workforce demographics, changing employee and community expectation, artificial intelligence are just some of the contextual challenges of navigating the landscape of perpetual changes within the European context. In the domain 'developing people' the constant state of uncertainty has had negative impact on mental health and wellbeing, leaders need prioritize developing a resilient and adaptable workforce. Coping mechanisms and strategies becomes crucial. This includes fostering critical thinking, problem-solving, and emotional regulation skills. In 'setting direction', leaders will be required to stay ahead of the curve and balance defence and offense: wait and watch balanced by actively seeking new opportunities using capabilities of insight, strategic commitment, and curiosity to act and adjust by listening to all parts of the organisation and outside. We expect robust discussion throughout the presentation followed by questions.

Brown, G., El-Erian, M., Spence, M., & Lidow, R. (2023). Permacrisis: A Plan to fix a fractured world. Simon & Schuster Cohen, S. S., & Goldfinger, C. (1975). From permacrisis to real crisis in French social security: An essay on the limits to normal politics. Berkeley, CA. Day, C. and Leithwood, K. (Eds), (2007), Successful Principal Leadership in Times of Change. An International Perspective, Springer-Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. Day, C. & Gurr, D. (Eds) (2014) Leading Schools Successfully: Stories from the field (London, UK: Routledge) 214pp. Day, C. & Gurr, D. (Eds) (2024) How Successful Schools Are More than Effective. Principals Who Build and Sustain Teacher and Student Wellbeing and Achievement (Cham.: Springer) Drysdale, L. & Gurr, D. (2017) Leadership in Uncertain Times, International Studies in Educational Administration, 45(2), 131-159. Gurr, D., ,& Drysdale, L. (2020) Leadership for Challenging Times - Lessons from the past and capabilities for the future. Australian Educational Leader, 42(3), 28-31. Leithwood, K. and Riehl, C. (2005), What we know about successful school leadership, Firestone, W. and Riehl, C. (Eds), A new agenda: Directions for research on educational leadership, Teachers College Press, New York, NY, pp. 22-47. Leithwood, K. and Day, C. (2007), What we learned: a broad view, Day, C. and Leithwood, K., (Eds), Successful school leadership in times of change, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 189-203. Leithwood, K., Harris A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited, School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5-22. Leithwood, K. and Sun, J. (2012), “The nature and effects of transformational school leadership: A meta-analytic review of unpublished research”, Educational Administration Quarterly, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp.387–423.