From legislation to implementation

Abstract

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to examine the leadership practice of an 11-member district team of educators assembled to respond to one of the most comprehensive bullying laws in the nation – the Massachusetts Anti-Bullying Law of 2010. This three-year case study provides school leaders and legislators with an in-depth, fine-grained analysis of how leadership was practiced by a district team of de facto leaders charged with implementing mandatory legislative policy throughout a six-school, 5,000-student, K-12 public school district.Design/methodology/approach– This three-year case study employed an analytical, distributed leadership framework to identify, categorize, and analyze key artifacts used by a team to design and implement system-wide the comprehensive requirements of legislation. Using Weft qualitative data analysis software and the open, axial, and selective coding guidelines of Strauss and Corbin, data from semi-structured interviews and document analysis revealed a number of hidden structural considerations exerting significant influence on the leadership practice of the team.Findings– Findings from this study suggest that leadership is perhaps more fluid than previously theorized. Defining leadership as a force that moves between and among organizational stakeholders (as opposed to a person or position), this study identified a number of structural considerations exerting influence on the leadership practice of a team. Furthermore, this study suggests that foreknowledge of these structural considerations may help to foster organizational learning, to leverage preexisting social and intellectual capital, and to more successfully navigate the requirements of complex organizational change such as legislative mandates and standards-based reform.Research limitations/implications– Because of the chosen research approach, the research results may lack generalizability. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to replicate this study in other school districts or large organizations who are responding to state or federal legislation.Practical implications– The paper includes implications for state and local educational leaders as they struggle with the increased demands of standards-based educational reform.Social implications– This study has implications for those seeking to understand how legislation is received and assimilated by schools as well as those seeking a greater understanding of formal and informal leadership.Originality/value– This paper fulfills an identified need to study how leadership is practiced in response to standards-based state and federal legislation.