As in many other European countries (Reezigt, 2001), Austrian schools are confronted with the demand for continued development both by societal changes (such as migration, digital transformation) and by government reforms. For example, the 2017 education law reform (BMBWF, 2017) promoted school autonomy and the possibility of school mergers, a 'diversity management' system was installed to organize inclusion, special needs education and gifted education (BMBWF, 2018b), a quality management system for schools including a quality framework was rolled out from 2020 (BMBWF, 2021) and beyond that significant efforts were made towards the digitalisation of schools (BMBWF, 2018a). To meet requirements and address the many everyday challenges, schools need to improve themselves continuously. This ongoing development, both at the individual school level and within the broader context of education, contributes to the overall advancement of the school system while also helping individual schools evolve into learning organizations (Hopkins et al., 2014).

In many cases, schools in Austria as in other countries can no longer manage their development projects on their own. They are increasingly dependent on external support helping them on their improvement path (Potter et al., 2002). This is why school development consulting, as an external support system, is becoming increasingly in demand.

In the Austrian educational context, those persons working as school development consultants are organized by regional University colleges of teacher education. They are primarily teachers with additional training, working as consultants on a part-time basis (Altrichter et al., 2021). Usually, schools ask for external consultancy in critical situations, such as school mergers or changes in school leadership (Dedering et al., 2022). Additionally, dysfunctional routines (Maag Merki et al., 2023) or the evaluation of results from external quality assessments (Dedering, 2024) can trigger a request for consulting. One of their offerings is team development, but they can also assist in establishing a suitable work structure (e.g., implementing steering groups) or in fostering professional development. The development processes generally follow a standardized procedure, beginning with a contract phase, followed by defining priorities, action and project planning, implementation, and evaluation, before cycling back to the start (Dalin, 2010). This process of continuous improvement aims to enhance the quality of teaching, strengthen the school's development capacity, and ultimately ensure that students fully benefit from their education. This focus on effectiveness is more prominent in international contexts (Potter et al., 2002) than in German-speaking countries, at least for now.

Despite this significant role of those external experts, there is little empirical evidence on the practical design of such processes— including activities, methods, and forms of intervention— particularly in Austria (Altrichter et al., 2021).

This paper focuses on the contract phase, which is critical to the success of consulting processes (Arnold & Reese, 2010). As the first stage, it lays the foundation for effective collaboration and is key to achieving optimal results. The presented paper addresses the identified research gap by, as a first step, examining how consulting processes begin. On this basis, the proposed paper aims to reconstruct the emerging relationship of the school and the consulting team, and its impact on the work of in-school actors. In addition to this, the emphasis is on the following aspects:

• The motive behind the request for support: What are the school’s needs?
• Who is involved in the contract phase, and what are the expectations regarding the process?
• Do the actual processes in the contract phase align with the recommendations for this phase found in consultancy literature?

Building on the recommendations by Dedering et al. (2013), the methodological approach adopts a multi-perspective case study with a longitudinal design (Yin, 2018). A case study is the appropriate choice when exploring the 'how' and 'why' of a research topic, particularly when investigating a contemporary phenomenon. While the entire consulting process is being studied, this article specifically focuses on data from the contract phase. Incorporating different perspectives on the same case, semi-structured interviews were conducted individually with school leaders and their consultants during the initiating phase. Additionally, participatory observations took place during the initial meetings, steering group sessions, and conferences with the whole team to understand who is involved in which role. Relevant planning and documentation papers (e.g., protocols and plans) were also analysed or used for comparison. The different perspectives (interviews, observations, document analysis) aim to provide the most comprehensive picture possible of what actually occurs during the contract phase. The multi-method approach also aims to reduce the risk of misinterpretation (Friebertshäuser, 2003, p. 505). The selected sample focuses on Austrian primary schools. Specifically, four consulting processes (cases) with different thematic orientations were scientifically monitored. The case selection was based on the premise of ensuring comparability (focusing on the primary level) while also reflecting the greatest possible variance in content, considering the different reasons for consulting (school mergers, inclusive development focus, and projects on linguistic diversity). Furthermore, care was taken to ensure that different consultants were responsible for each of the selected processes. The data is analysed using a content analysis approach. Categories are primarily formed inductively, based on the grounded theory (Strauss & Corbin, 1997). MAXQDA was used as software to support this approach.

The first results highlight the importance of the contract phase in long-term consulting processes for school development. During this phase, expectations and goals are set, roles are clarified, and a trusting working relationship is built. Although these general characteristics are frequently mentioned in the respective literature, the data analysed so far clearly indicates that the approach of the consulting teams is often highly individualized, tailored to the specific needs of each school. For example, clear goal agreements are often not made upfront. Instead, consultants tend to explore and assess the different systems, carefully considering what is possible within the given context. Additionally, personal relations with institutions involved in consulting processes play a role in facilitating initial contact. In this context, one school leader aptly compares the first interaction with the consultants to the intimacy of a doctor's visit, in the sense of a diagnostic initial consultation. In line with the different understandings of roles that emerged during the data analysis, schools primarily see consultants as 'knowledgeable experts,' describing them as figures who provide reassurance for their improvement efforts. As one school leader says, 'They tell us what to do and how it works.' Consultants, however, more often report discrepancies between their idealized vision of a successful contract phase and how it actually unfolds. Based on the data, it can be observed that after the initial contact, typically between the school leader and one of the consultants, the group of involved actors gradually expands. However, what still needs further investigation is why consultants perceive a clear formulation of objectives, while head teachers do not report such a formulation.

Altrichter, H., Krainz, U., Kemethofer, D., Jesacher-Rößler, L., Hautz, H., & Brauckmann-Sajkiewicz, S. (2021). Schulentwicklungsberatung und Schulentwicklungsberatungsforschung. BMBWF [Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung] (Eds.), Nationaler Bildungsbericht Österreich. DOI: http://doi.org/10.17888/nbb2021-3 Arnold, E., & Reese, M. (2010). Externe Beratung. Handbuch Schulentwicklung, 298-302. BMBWF. (2017). Bildungsreformgesetz 2017. https://www.bmbwf.gv.at/Themen/schule/schulrecht/erk/bildungsreformgesetz_2017.html BMBWF. (2018a). Masterplan Digitalisierung. https://www.bmbwf.gv.at/Themen/schule/zrp/dibi/mp.html BMBWF. (2018b). Pädagogikpaket 2018. https://www.bmbwf.gv.at/Themen/schule/schulrecht/erk/paedagogik_paket_2018.html BMBWF, I./V. (2021). Der Qualitätsrahmen für Schulen. https://www.qms.at/images/Qualitaetsrahmen_fuer_Schulen.pdf Dalin, P. (2010). School Development. Bloomsbury Publishing. Dedering, K. (2024). Unterstützungssysteme im einzelschulischen Entwicklungsprozess. Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung, 1-27. Dedering, K., Kamarianakis, E., & Racherbäumer, K. (2022). Schulentwicklungsberatung: Begrifflich-konzeptionelle Grundlegung, empirische Betrachtung und (kritische) Perspektivierung. DDS–Die Deutsche Schule, 114(4), 345-362. https://doi.org/10.31244/dds.2022.04.02 D Dedering, K., Tillmann, K. J., Goecke, M., & Rauh, M. (2013). Wenn Experten in die Schule kommen: Schulentwicklungsberatung-empirisch betrachtet (Vol. 23). Springer-Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-01402-5 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-01402-5 Friebertshäuser, B. (2003). Feldforschung und teilnehmende Beobachtung. In B. Friebertshäuser (Eds.), Handbuch qualitative Forschungsmethoden in der Erziehungswissenschaft (Studienausg, p. 503–534). Juventa-Verlag. Hopkins, D., Stringfield, S., Harris, A., Stoll, L. & Mackay, T. (2014). School and system improvement: a narrative state-of-the-art review. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 25(2), 257–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2014.885452 Maag Merki, K., Wullschleger, A. & Rechsteiner, B. (2023). Adapting routines in schools when facing challenging situations: Extending previous theories on routines by considering theories on self-regulated and collectively regulated learning. Journal of Educational Change, 24(3), 583–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-022-09459-1 Potter, D., Reynolds, D. & Chapman, C. (2002). School Improvement for Schools Facing Challenging Circumstances: A review of research and practice. School Leadership & Management, 22(3), 243–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/1363243022000020381 Reezigt, G. J. (2001). A framework for effective school improvement: Final report of the ESI project. University of Groningen, Groningen/Netherlands. Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J. M. (1997). Grounded theory in practice. Sage Publ. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (Sixth edition). SAGE.