Over ten years ago, Hunt and Peterson (1997) debated that leadership is a global concept that should be studied scientifically and internationally. Others have pointed out that with the increase of globalization, more research is needed in order to understand the boundaries of current leadership frameworks across cultures (Dorfman & Howell, 1997; Helgstrand & Stuhlmacher, 1999). Accordingly, Dimmock (2000) and Mellahi (2000) indicated that leadership theories, policies, and practices have been transported worldwide and have been introduced to a variety of cultures and societies; yet, little research has been focused on whether such theories, policies, or practices are relevant to international cultures. The purpose of our case study was to examine the leadership of Mexican educational leaders in a non-public school setting1 through the lens of a leadership theory, the synergistic leadership theory (SLT) (Irby, Brown, Duffy, & Trautman, 2002).

First, we review our rationale for employing the SLT as the theoretical framework. Next, we elaborate the methodological procedures of our qualitative case study, including context of the study, population and sample, instrumentation, data collection, data analysis, and validity and reliability of this qualitative research. Finally, we present and discuss our findings from the case study.

Several researchers have pointed out that traditional leadership theories in business and education in the United States (U.S.) have been representative of only White male leaders (Blackmore, 1989; Capper, 1993; Glazer, 1991; Shakeshaft, 1989; Shakeshaft, Brown, Irby, Grogan, & Ballenger, 2007; Shakeshaft & Nowell, 1984; Trautman, 2000); thus, such traditional Anglo-centric and male-biased theories not only limit applicability within U.S. mainstream culture, but also among other non-U.S. countries and cultures.

Irby, Brown, and Trautman (1999) analyzed the original development of 24 traditional leadership theories (Table 1) commonly taught in U.S. leadership and management courses. That initial analysis of the original theories published between 1939 and 1991 and still presented today in major leadership and management texts resulted in nine generalizations including these three:

We add two other generalizations related to the 24 commonly taught leadership theories to our original ones: (a) Although the 24 theories did not recognized diversity in terms of gender, ethnicity, or across cultures in their development, they have been generalized across cultures and ethnicity, and (b) While the theories have been generalized by broad-based common acclamation, the 24 theories have not been validated across genders, cultures, and ethnicities via sufficient, arduous studies.

Concerned with the exclusive nature of the aforementioned leadership theories, Irby, Brown, and Duffy (1999) developed the SLT utilizing both quantitative and qualitative data gathered from (a) an exhaustive review of the literature, (b) surveys of 30 women leaders in education and business, and (c) open-ended interviews of 10 female school executives and 10 scholars in leadership preparation programs. Further, Irby, Brown and Duffy (1999) and Irby, Brown, and Trautman (1999, 2000) presented the theory in several scientific conventions and obtained feedback from scholars and practitioners in the field. The developers considered the feedback from both males and females of varying ethnicities in furthering the development of the theory. Interested in ensuring the theory had validity with diverse groups, Brown, Irby, and Duffy directed several research studies based on the SLT with various ethnicities in the U.S.; however, the SLT had not been used as a theoretical framework in studies of leaders in other countries. Therefore, it was our desire to use the SLT as a theoretical framework, or a lens, through which we examined the leadership of two Mexican educational leaders in a non-public school in Mexico.

The SLT is based on the following major assumptions: (a) leadership is the interaction among four factors -- attitudes, beliefs, and values; leadership behavior; external forces; and organizational structure and (b) an alignment of all four factors contributes to the leader and the organization being perceived as effective or successful, while a misalignment among the four factors generally results in negative perceptions of the effectiveness of the leader or organization (Irby et al., 2002) if left unaddressed. A tetrahedral model (Figure 1) depicts the SLT’s four equal and interactive factors: (a) attitudes, beliefs and values; (b) leadership behaviors; (c) organizational structure; and (d) external forces (Irby et al.), which are identified by four stellar points with six interaction pairs. This model can be rotated on any apex and still maintain its shape, thereby indicating no structural hierarchy and suggesting that it is the dynamic interaction of each of the four factors that affects the perceived success of the leader. Following, each of the four factors of the SLT is described briefly.

Figure 1: The SLT Tetrahedral Model

Although each of the four factors of the SLT may be found in the literature within other leadership theories and/or models, a distinctive feature of the SLT is that, observed in tandem, the four factors are equalized and interactive without hierarchical rank. Examples of some traditional theories that include parts of the SLT’s four factors are: (a) the Ohio State studies, (b) the University of Michigan studies, (c) the managerial grid, and (d) situational leadership. While in these four theories, components or aspects of one or more of the four factors may be present, they exist either in isolation or in part or in a hierarchical arrangement.

Regarding leadership, in the Ohio state studies (Halpin & Winer, 1952; Hemphill & Coons, 1950), leadership is bifurcated into initiating structure and consideration and is suggested to be a style approach to leading subordinates in certain situations. The SLT, however, includes a range of leadership behaviors, as opposed to a broader leadership style, and considers organizational structure, external forces, and values, attitudes, and beliefs as each of those factors interacts with leadership behaviors. In the University of Michigan studies (Likert, 1961), the term, leadership behaviors, is mentioned; however, it consists of only two behaviors-- employee orientation and production orientation. Further, the Michigan studies theory does not take into account a range of behaviors related to various situations, including time, place, and relationships, as does the SLT. An additional theory, Blake and Mouton’s (1968) original managerial grid, focuses on identifying one of five leadership styles with relation to production versus people orientation. However, there are no specific generalizations relating a specific style to a particular situation. In contrast, in the SLT, the leadership behaviors are related to the organizational structure, to attitudes, values, and beliefs, and to external forces which comprise the situation within which the leader finds him/herself. Although the Hersey and Blanchard (1969) situational leadership model does relate leadership to situations, it focuses on leadership style and on the development level of the subordinates as noted in dyadic terms, with leaders interacting with employees in a given situation and adapting their style to match the development level of the employee. The SLT, however, takes the stance that leadership behavior is active and dynamic, interacting with organizational structures, values, attitudes, and beliefs, and external forces. In the Hersey and Blanchard situational leadership model, it is incumbent upon the leader to adapt to the employee. Conversely, in the SLT, several alternatives are available in order for the leader and the organization to accomplish purposes or goals. The leader may (a) adapt by altering leadership behavior based on a broad scan of all four factors, (b) attempt to alter the organization and external forces, or even modify attitudes, values, and beliefs of colleagues, or (c) analyze the situation with a systemic view of the four factors and determine that the position he/she finds him/herself in is not a fit. If this is the case, the leader may choose to leave the position and/or organization.

We selected the SLT as the theoretical framework in our case study because the SLT has the following characteristics which render it potentially appropriate for other cultures: (a) postmodern views of inclusiveness, (b) non-hierarchical rank of factors, and (c) active and dynamic interactions of factors (Shapiro, 2009, Irby et al., 2002). The SLT emphasizes the equal and interactive relationship among the four factors and acknowledges the impact of alignment or misalignment among the four factors. The theory assumes that when there is an alignment among all four factors, the leader will be perceived as effective. On the contrary, a misalignment among the four factors results in tension which can have a negative impact on the perception of the leaders’ effectiveness (Irby et al.). The SLT’s emphasis on the importance of the alignment among the four factors implies that “no matter what values, beliefs, attitudes, leadership behaviors, organizational structures, and external forces are, the leader and organization can be perceived as effective if there is an alignment among the four factors” (Yang, Irby, & Brown, 2008, p. 18). The emphasis on alignment among the four factors does not mean that there will not be conflict, disarray, or turmoil in a leader’s professional world; for indeed, if leaders find themselves in a chaotic situation where factors are misaligned, then there is a need to take action which may result in change and which, ultimately, should bring the factors back into alignment. In this sense, the SLT seeks regularity from irregularity or synergy from antagonism.

Since its development, Irby, Brown, and Duffy have directed studies of the SLT in order to better understand leadership practices and educational organizations (Bamberg, 2004; Hernandez, 2004; Holtkamp, Irby, Brown, & Yang, 2007; Kaspar, 2006; Ardovini, Trautman, Brown, & Irby, 2006; Truslow, 2004). Some additional studies have been conducted at Western Carolina University (Justice, 2007), Lamar University (Taliafero, 2007), and Virginia Tech (Jones & Leonard, 2009). Although the SLT has been validated for both males and females in a variety of contexts and across ethnicities in the U.S., until this current study, it had not been utilized as a theoretical framework in an international setting. However, prior studies of the SLT indicate that the theory has the potential for the use as a theoretical framework, or lens, for leadership in other cultures, because, foundationally, the SLT....

Our qualitative case study was conducted with two Mexican leaders, one male and one female, of a private school in southeastern Mexico. We selected these leaders because of previous university/school collaborations and the leaders’ willingness to be included in the study. According to these leaders, they led a non-governmental, nonprofit school established in 1985 with an objective to alleviate the injustices and the inequities that have existed among low-income youth across Mexico. The leaders (also founders of the school) endeavored to offer an alternative educational system the public education system that perpetuated the status quo. The alternative curriculum focused on basic survival, academic knowledge, social responsibility, and self-esteem skills. The purpose of the school was not to prove an educational model, but to do something to improve the life conditions of one of the most impoverished sectors of Mexican society. To reach these goals, the two leaders established three main premises that make up the foundation of the educational program: (a) developing a social base to solve problems and combat poverty, (b) empowering the children by making them active participants in the solution, and (c) encouraging the children to become productive as well as change agents in their community (Leader two, personal communication, June 14, 2000).

The leaders initiated the school in their home with three children from the streets, but at the time of our study the school served 1,500 children and youth and 250 families in the community. They designed the school to be a collaborative effort between the learners, educators, and the community to ensure that cooperative learning occurs to improve the whole child, the community, and ultimately, Mexico (Leader one, personal communication, June 14, 2000). The school’s organizational structure included a main decision-making body comprised of the leaders, teachers, students, parents, community members, and sponsors, whose annual projects were supervised by an elected council. The organization’s staff encompassed 20 members; 80% were women from multidisciplinary fields.

Additionally, to increase opportunities for Mexican indigenous youth by fostering and developing human competency and social and entrepreneurial skills, the leaders helped to create a community leadership program for children and youth. This program was presently implemented in 10 indigenous and rural communities in the state where our study was conducted. The program staff had trained 300 indigenous youths who worked with approximately 5,310 community children. The goal of the program was to assist these youngsters in becoming promoters and instructors in their community through working in adult literacy programs, community infrastructure improvement projects, ecological and reforestation projects, and local projects to beautify parks and green areas (Leader two, personal communication, June 14, 2000).

Four researchers contributed to this project. One of the researchers (Researcher A) had been traveling to this part of Mexico every summer for six years prior to this study. Additionally, Researcher A served on the dissertation committee of one of the Mexican educational leaders at a private university in Mexico. This researcher, bilingual in Spanish and English, had visited the indigenous communities and had observed the leaders’ projects in several Mexican communities. Researcher B also knew the leaders, as she had visited with them during meetings in the United States and in Mexico. Researcher B is an expert in leadership theory. The third researcher, Researcher C, is a native of Mexico and conducted the onsite interviews and observations. Researcher C gathered all the data. The final researcher, Researcher D, is competent in cultural contexts and the cross-cultural issues related to the SLT and has critiqued the theory in other cultural contexts.

In our research design, we used a case study approach. Yin (1994) defined a case study as “an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident…[and] relies on multiple sources of evidence” (p. 13). Merriam (1998) and Stake (2005) identified a case study as an examination of a bounded system or case. Merriam further clarified a case study as “an examination of a specific phenomenon such as a program, an event, a person, a process, an institution, or a social group” (p. 9), which may be selected as an example of a concern or issue. Case studies can be descriptive, interpretative, or evaluative; but most of them are a combination of the three (Merriam, 1988). In our case study, we analyzed the leaders and others’ perceptions of their leadership through the theoretical framework, or the lens, of the four factors of the SLT, and we described and interpreted the leaders’ situation within their context of a non-public school of southeastern Mexico.