Volume 8, Issue 1 (3-2025)
Iranian Journal of Educational Sociology 2025, 8(1): 32-41 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Arabshahi T, Davoodi R, Afzali M. (2025). Modeling Succession Strategies for Elementary School Managers. Iranian Journal of Educational Sociology. 8(1), 32-41. doi:10.61838/kman.ijes.8.1.4
URL: http://iase-idje.ir/article-1-1444-en.html
URL: http://iase-idje.ir/article-1-1444-en.html
1- PhD student in Educational Management, Department of Educational Sciences, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran.
2- Assistant Professor of Educational Management, Department of Educational Sciences, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran.
3- Assistant Professor of Information and Document Management (Zanjan Studies), Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran.
2- Assistant Professor of Educational Management, Department of Educational Sciences, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran.
3- Assistant Professor of Information and Document Management (Zanjan Studies), Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran.
Abstract: (284 Views)
Purpose: This study aims to identify and validate succession planning strategies for elementary school managers, providing a comprehensive framework to support leadership transitions in educational settings.
Methodology: This mixed-methods study employed both qualitative and quantitative approaches. The qualitative phase involved semi-structured interviews with 25 experts in human resource and educational management, selected through purposive sampling. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key succession strategies. The quantitative phase included a survey of 380 educational managers from Tehran, selected via stratified random sampling. The survey instrument was developed based on the qualitative findings and validated through confirmatory factor analysis. Data were analyzed using SPSS and SmartPLS software.
Findings: The qualitative analysis identified seven key strategies for succession planning: familiarization of managers, participation, organizational learning, trust building, foresight, independence of education, and systemic vision. These strategies were supported by detailed actions such as mentoring programs, collaborative decision-making, and continuous professional development. Quantitative analysis confirmed the importance and effectiveness of these strategies, with high mean scores and strong support among respondents. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated the reliability and validity of the measurement model for these strategies.
Conclusion: The study highlights the critical importance of a multifaceted approach to succession planning in educational management. By implementing strategies such as familiarization, participation, organizational learning, trust building, foresight, independence, and a systemic vision, schools can ensure smooth leadership transitions, maintain organizational stability, and promote continuous improvement. The findings provide a robust framework for educational leaders and policymakers to enhance leadership succession planning in schools.
Methodology: This mixed-methods study employed both qualitative and quantitative approaches. The qualitative phase involved semi-structured interviews with 25 experts in human resource and educational management, selected through purposive sampling. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis to identify key succession strategies. The quantitative phase included a survey of 380 educational managers from Tehran, selected via stratified random sampling. The survey instrument was developed based on the qualitative findings and validated through confirmatory factor analysis. Data were analyzed using SPSS and SmartPLS software.
Findings: The qualitative analysis identified seven key strategies for succession planning: familiarization of managers, participation, organizational learning, trust building, foresight, independence of education, and systemic vision. These strategies were supported by detailed actions such as mentoring programs, collaborative decision-making, and continuous professional development. Quantitative analysis confirmed the importance and effectiveness of these strategies, with high mean scores and strong support among respondents. Confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated the reliability and validity of the measurement model for these strategies.
Conclusion: The study highlights the critical importance of a multifaceted approach to succession planning in educational management. By implementing strategies such as familiarization, participation, organizational learning, trust building, foresight, independence, and a systemic vision, schools can ensure smooth leadership transitions, maintain organizational stability, and promote continuous improvement. The findings provide a robust framework for educational leaders and policymakers to enhance leadership succession planning in schools.
Keywords: Succession Planning, Educational Leadership, School Management, Leadership Development, Organizational Learning, Strategic Planning, Trust Building
Type of Study: Research Article |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2024/05/21 | Accepted: 2024/09/16 | Published: 2024/12/15
Received: 2024/05/21 | Accepted: 2024/09/16 | Published: 2024/12/15
References
1. Abdellah, H. R. A. (2021). Managerial Succession Planning for School Principals Introduction to Organizational Development in the Light of Rothwell's Model. International Journal of Research in Educational Sciences, 4(3), 201-228. [DOI:10.29009/ijres.4.3.5]
2. Bengtson, E., Zepeda, S. J., & Parylo, O. (2013). School Systems' Practices of Controlling Socialization During Principal Succession. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 41(2), 143-164. [DOI:10.1177/1741143212468344]
3. Claudet, J. (2014). Nurturing Distributed Leadership Environments in Schools: Creative Strategies for Increasing Community Engagement and Energizing School Turnaround Efforts. Open Journal of Leadership, 03(02), 39-52. [DOI:10.4236/ojl.2014.32005]
4. Fink, D., & Brayman, C. (2006). School Leadership Succession and the Challenges of Change. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(1), 62-89.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X05278186 [DOI:10.1177/0013161x05278186]
5. Ghozelin, V. M., & Syaifudin, F. (2022). Leadership Style and Role of a Female Principal in Improving the Quality of Education at Bondalem Elementary School. Al-Fikrah Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan, 10(2), 191. [DOI:10.31958/jaf.v10i2.5628]
6. Jackson, B. A., & Allen, S. (2022). Succession Planning for Senior Leaders: Is It Always a Good Idea? International Journal of Educational Management, 36(5), 800-811.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-12-2020-0576 [DOI:10.1108/ijem-12-2020-0576]
7. Jacobson, S. H. (2011). Leadership Effects on Student Achievement and Sustained School Success. International Journal of Educational Management, 25(1), 33-44. [DOI:10.1108/09513541111100107]
8. Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven Strong Claims About Successful School Leadership. School Leadership and Management, 28(1), 27-42. [DOI:10.1080/13632430701800060]
9. Nafi'a, Z. I., & Suyatno, S. (2020). The Effect of Teachers' Leadership on Students' Motivation in Al-Islam Tambakbayan Elementary School. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(5), 1907-1915. [DOI:10.13189/ujer.2020.080527]
10. Peters-Hawkins, A. L., Reed, L. C., & Kingsberry, F. (2017). Dynamic Leadership Succession: Strengthening Urban Principal Succession Planning. Urban Education, 53(1), 26-54. [DOI:10.1177/0042085916682575]
11. Peters, A. L. (2011). (Un)Planned Failure: Unsuccessful Succession Planning in an Urban District. Journal of School Leadership, 21(1), 64-86. [DOI:10.1177/105268461102100104]
12. Printy, S. M., Marks, H. M., & Bowers, A. J. (2009). Integrated Leadership: How Principals and Teachers Share Transformational and Instructional Influence. Journal of School Leadership, 19(5), 504-532. [DOI:10.1177/105268460901900501]
13. Robinson, V., Lloyd, C., & Rowe, K. (2008). The Impact of Leadership on Student Outcomes: An Analysis of the Differential Effects of Leadership Types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635-674.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X08321509 [DOI:10.1177/0013161x08321509]
14. Sulit, A. (2020). Leadership Can't Stand Alone: Why School Districts Need Policy to Increase Teacher Retention. Ejournal of Education Policy, 21(2).
https://doi.org/10.37803/ejepF2008 [DOI:10.37803/ejepf2008]
15. Titzer, J., & Shirey, M. R. (2013). Nurse Manager Succession Planning: A Concept Analysis. Nursing Forum, 48(3), 155-164. [DOI:10.1111/nuf.12024] [PMID]
16. Zepeda, S. J., Bengtson, E., & Parylo, O. (2012). Examining the Planning and Management of Principal Succession. Journal of Educational Administration, 50(2), 136-158. [DOI:10.1108/09578231211210512]
17. Zuckerman, S. J., Wilcox, K. C., Durand, F. T., Lawson, H. A., & Schiller, K. S. (2017). Drivers for Change: A Study of Distributed Leadership and Performance Adaptation During Policy Innovation Implementation. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 17(4), 618-646. [DOI:10.1080/15700763.2017.1384500]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
.jpg)
