Abstract
This paper examines peer-reviewed research articles from Western countries on school leadership in times of crisis published from 2013 to 2024. The objective of this review is to enhance our understanding of the features of school-level crises, the challenges principals face, and the effective roles and actions they undertake during such events. We aim to contribute to the existing body of research by uncovering the dilemmas school leaders encounter when managing crises. The literature review identified 51 relevant articles across 14 countries, 32 of which are about principal leadership amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on the findings, four dilemmas have been discussed: (1) whether to prioritize individual power and responsibility over shared leadership, (2) whether to render care and support or strictly fulfill managerial duties, (3) whether to be true to one's core values and beliefs or respond quickly and (4) whether to give up control or provide stability amid constant uncertainty. Our findings indicate that, during crises, school leaders should strike a balance between exercising individual power and facilitating collaboration, between relational aspects and operational expectations, between individual and collective decision-making, and between being in constant uncertainty and providing predictability.
Introduction
The subject of leadership in times of crisis has received renewed interest in educational research after the COVID-19 pandemic, and it has been discussed whether a changing leadership order is currently emerging (Harris and Jones, 2020). The pandemic and current times of disruption have given rise to the need to heed crisis leadership in schools, where school leaders need to prepare for, respond to, diminish, and learn from crises (e.g. Grissom and Condon, 2021). In this paper, we follow the work of Smith and Riley (2012) to define crises as mostly unpredictable and inherently unique events and, in the context of a school, as urgent situations that require the school leadership to take rapid and decisive action.
The work of school leaders has changed over the past three decades due to, for instance, new demands related to school quality, accountability, and education policy reforms (e.g. Leithwood, 2007; Møller, 2017; Thessin and Louis, 2019). The risks faced by schools in recent times are considerably different than those faced by educational leaders in the 21st century, with the nature of the work conditions, expectations, and accountabilities now being different and more complex (Starr, 2008). Leadership in times of crisis has been stated to be about “dealing with events, emotions, and consequences in the immediate present in ways that minimize personal and organizational harm to the school and school community” (Smith and Riley, 2012). Moreover, education leadership has been defined as being historically constituted, ethically informed, social, and political (Carr, 2007). Hence, conceptions of educational leadership are dynamic, contested, culturally situated, and at the center of socio-political and ideological struggles where context is essential (e.g. Gunnulfsen, 2023; Gunter, 2001; Hallinger, 2018).
The notion of context, such as a sudden crisis, includes individual obligations and deficiencies in educational leadership and exposes the need for research focusing on values, beliefs, and identities that are essential to leaders’ practices (Crow and Scribner, 2013; Lumby and English, 2009). As Rosenthal et al. (1989) points out “crisis should be understood as periods of upheaval and collective stress, disturbing everyday patterns and threatening core values and structures of a social system in unexpected, often unconceivable ways.” Furthermore, Rosenthal et al. (2001) underlines that managing crises involves both treats, dilemmas, and opportunities.
This literature review aims to enhance understanding of school leadership during crises by exploring various educational leadership perspectives, and we employ a pragmatic approach to our research questions.
The primary research question of this paper is as follows:
What kind of dilemmas do school leaders face in times of crisis?
Further, the sub-questions for this research are as follows:
What are the characteristics of a school-level crisis? What challenges do principals encounter during a crisis? What are effective roles and actions principals engage in during a crisis?
The following sections cover various analytical perspectives on educational leadership, outline our method and analytical approach, present our findings and discussion, and conclude with our final remarks.
Analytical perspectives on educational leadership
In this study, we aim to enhance our understanding of educational leadership within a multidisciplinary field that encompasses politics, sociology, psychology, history, philosophy, and economics (Gunter, 2001). Educational leadership can be defined as the work done to mobilize and influence others to develop shared understandings and intentions and achieve the objectives of the school (e.g. Firestone and Rihel, 2005; Gunter, 2004; Leithwood, 2005). The influence of others, along with perspectives on power and conflict, underpins nearly all aspects of studying leadership and change within local school organizations. These dimensions involve studying leadership as part of micro-policy work in schools (Ball, 2012). The ways in which leadership functions as an individual, collective, and relational practice (Sørhaug, 1996) have influenced our analysis of the findings considered in this review. When investigating educational leadership and crises, the authenticity and commonality of school leaders and the leading of education and leadership as a relational practice are vital aspects to consider. Further, a school's cultural values, ways of thinking, and work for social justice opportunities are located within a wider community (Crow and Møller, 2017; Gunter and Courtney, 2021). Schools are complex organizations that have complex objectives and practices (e.g. Biesta, 2015).
Today, school leaders at all levels are increasingly being held accountable for the performance and quality of their schools, and professional discretion and dilemmas are central factors in this regard (Larsen, 2021). According to Møller (1996), dilemma is a fundamental expression in principals’ everyday life and refers to conflicting and diffused situations that demand ethical decision-making because competing and central values cannot be upheld at the same time. The right answer doesn't exist, and each solution brings both advantages and disadvantages. Dilemmas often involve contradicting expectations, and the challenge is to strike a balance between them. Møller (1996) distinguishes between loyalty dilemmas and governance dilemmas in the work of principals, whereas Spillane and Lowenhaupt (2019) emphasize the responsibility dilemma faced by principals as the heads of schools. Spillane and Lowenhaupt (2019) underlines that the principal is bearing the ultimate responsibility and therefore being hold accountable for both successes and failures in the organization. Effective dilemma management is essential for leadership in education, as it involves selecting less-than-ideal solutions. The complexity of dilemmas can lead to unfavorable outcomes, necessitating careful prioritization. School leaders face significant responsibilities, as their decisions impact students, staff, parents, and the community.
Therefore, educational leadership can be defined as both an individual role as well as a relational practice within rational structures, systems, and cultures that enable control and extensive delegation (Gunter and Grimaldi, 2021). In this study, we consider educational leadership a collective, relational practice involving power, trust, and control, which serves as the foundation for analyzing the findings obtained through our literature review.
Method
This study is a literature review of peer-reviewed research articles about school leadership and crises that have been published within the last 10 years (2013–2024). The period of 2013–2024 was chosen because we wanted to examine the recent literature on this topic. Literature reviews generally analyze published literature to imply some degree of permanence and, possibly, subject published studies to a peer-review process. They seek to identify what has been previously accomplished in a specific field of study, allowing for the consolidation of findings, building on previous work, the summation of past research, avoiding duplication, and identifying omissions and gaps in the literature (Grant and Booth, 2009).
Search strategy and databases
Relevant search terms were identified based on existing publications on the topic, and a comprehensive search string was created. We identified search terms and subject headings related to the three central concepts in our research questions: school leadership, school, and crisis. The same search string was employed across different databases, with certain adaptations made for each specific database. The relevant databases selected for this study were ERIC (Ovid), Education Research Complete, Psych Info, and Web of Science. The search was conducted based on title, abstract, and keywords and yielded 3547 studies to be screened. It was conducted on 21 March 2024.
Eligibility criteria and the screening process
The search results from the databases were transferred into the screening tool Covidence. The screening process comprised a two-step sorting process based on predetermined eligibility criteria: (1) screening of title and abstract and (2) screening of full text. Table 1 shows an overview of the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria used for the sorting process. Only Western countries are included in order to delineate the scope of the study as well as aiming to make the findings applicable to a Nordic context, as Western countries often have comparable school systems as well as sharing cultural norms and values.
Overview of the inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Both screening steps were independently conducted by two reviewers to minimize bias. The Covidence tool employs active learning, a machine learning model from the EPPI Centre at University College London, to enhance systematic reviews. AI analyzes patterns during screening and predicts text relevance based on prior decisions, improving accuracy over time. However, AI tools have limitations; they can only perform tasks they are trained for, which can lead to errors.
After screening 1548 out of the total 3096 research articles, we collected the most relevant texts based on our predetermined criteria. We retained 159 articles for full-text screening and ultimately identified 51 relevant texts for our literature review. Table 2 presents an overview of the screening process.
Overview of the article screening.
Analytical approach
The SALSA framework (search, appraisal, synthesis, analysis) was applied in this review (Grant and Booth, 2009) and we conducted a thematic content analysis to identify common themes and categories, creating meaningful units for conclusion drawing (Anderson, 2007; Cohen et al., 2018). Initial codes such as change, decision-making, culture/values, responsibility, role/attributes, support, communication, and collaboration emerged from our material. Data were then summarized and organized into four inductively built thematic areas: (1) individual power and collective trust, (2) personal emotion and professional control, (3) core values and rapid response, and (4) uncertainty and stability. To minimize interpretative bias, themes were analyzed separately before comparison and modification (Anderson, 2007). Our final analysis centrally features the dilemma dimension of principal leadership, based on Møller's (1996) government dilemmas and Spillane and Lowenhaupt's (2019) responsible dilemma. Findings were peer-reviewed within our local research group as part of the process.
Findings
Out of the 51 articles in our review, 32 focused on school leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic, making research from 2020 the majority of our sources for understanding school leadership during crises, particularly health-related ones. Table 3 provides an overview of the selected articles.
Overview of the articles included in this literature review.
Characteristics of a school-level crisis
There are several types of crises, but the common themes across the various definitions of a crisis in school leadership research are suddenness, unexpectedness, and lack of preparedness. Another common feature is that crises change the lives of those most affected—both individually and collectively (Mutch, 2015).
Sudden and unexpected situations that require immediate action
Mitoff (2002, as cited in Hess and Lowery, 2020) describes crises as events that are sudden and unanticipated; they can be economic, informational, destructive, reputational, or violent. Sutherland (2017) suggests that crises have four common characteristics: (1) a threat to a system, (2) time pressure, (3) an ill-structured situation, and (4) a lack of adequate resources for a proper response.
According to Ritchie (2004, as cited in Brion and Kiral, 2021), crises are sudden, unexpected events that require immediate action. These situations often threaten the high-level goals of an organization, jeopardize the organization's life, require a quick response, and create tension such that the organization's crisis prediction and prevention mechanisms become inadequate. This aligns with the definition of crises proposed by Smith and Riley (2012, as cited in Thornton, 2021a): an urgent situation that requires immediate and decisive action by an organization and, in particular, by the leaders of the organization. Potter et al. (2021) define crises as times of uncertainty with unprecedented circumstances that bring unforeseen challenges. Another way of defining a crisis in educational leadership research is as a critical incident, experience, or event that results in difficult educational circumstances (Lenarduzzi, 2015).
Uncertainty and challenging circumstances
Other researchers define a crisis as a period of uncertainty and turbulence (Drysdale and Gurr, 2017; Howard and Dhillon, 2021; Norberg and Gross, 2019). Norberg and Gross (2019) argue that “organizational turbulence at some level is a constant; what varies is the level of turbulence ranging from light to extreme.” Moreover, Ahlström et al. (2020) define a crisis as unusual and challenging circumstances, emphasizing that leading schools require a set of generic leadership strategies for such times. This perspective aligns with the work of Stuart et al. (2013), who emphasize the significance of decisive action and clear communication by principals during complex and challenging situations, which can impact student well-being. They also state that, when disasters occur, principals usually find themselves in unfamiliar territory, making decisions in an environment of uncertainty. Reyes-Guerra et al. (2021) highlight that “crises are intrusive and painful experiences for educational leaders and all school stakeholders, and a mishandled crisis poses the significant threat of negatively impacting an organization.” This aligns with the description of crises proposed by Mutch (2015): unexpected events that can cause both major physical damage as well as psychological harm.
A time of great change, unpredictability, and complexity
The COVID-19 pandemic has considerably stimulated research on educational leadership and crisis. This has been described by Gurr and Drysdale (2020) and Dunn (2020) as a time of great change, uncertainty, unpredictability, and complexity. Other researchers describe this period as a time of global emergency (Netolicky, 2020), with new and rapidly changing circumstances (Beauchamp et al., 2021), and state that the uncertain educational environments created extraordinary challenges for school leaders (Bagwell, 2020). The atypical environment (Brown et al., 2021) disrupted education (Bagwell, 2020) and made it a unique and unprecedented period (Watson and Singh, 2022). Lucena Rodriguez et al. (2022) argue that the COVID-19 crisis included complexity, which resulted in a period of rapid change. Similarly, Dunn (2020) highlights that this crisis posed adaptive challenges and coerced us to move beyond what we understood and did then. The author also underlines that the complex problems that occur during times of crisis often do not have obvious solutions. Hayes and Derrington (2023) describe the COVID-19 crisis as “circumstances of extreme pressure and stress,” while Ahtiainen et al. (2024) describe it as “times of both turbulence and tranquility.”
Challenges school leaders encounter during a crisis
Bishop et al. (2015) highlight the crucial role of the leader of a school during a crisis. They argue that community members expect them to respond to the crisis because of their positions in the wider community. Other findings from the research on the COVID-19 crisis suggest that principals were required to take responsibility for a much more extensive range of actions and activities during the pandemic (Brown et al., 2021). Argyropoulou et al. (2021) claim that a new aspect of school leadership emerged due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which was based on human interaction, less control, extended use of emotional intelligence, and the need to address the ethical aspects of school leadership. This aligns with the results of Ramos-Pla et al. (2021), which indicate that principals do not lead in the same manner during times of crisis as they normally do.
School leader attributes, competencies, and skills
Grissom and Condon (2021) argue that there are three sets of competencies that school leaders need to hone for effective crisis management: analysis, sensemaking, and judgment; communication; and emotional intelligence. Similarly, Reyes-Guerra et al. (2021) highlighted the qualities and capacities that were essential for leading during the COVID-19 crisis. Findings from the considered research show that principals drew upon their individual reservoirs of shared leader qualities, “leading with flexibility, creativity, and care; bending rules and shifting priorities; and showing resilience under pressure.” The research carried out by Thornton (2021a) underlines five effective leadership practices: Preparing for crises by detecting signals and responding appropriately, demonstrating empathy and prioritizing the well-being of all stakeholders, communicating frequently and effectively using a range of media, leading collaboratively by involving others in leadership and taking a community leadership role, and taking opportunities to learn at all stages of the crisis.
The central role of the school leader
Sellars and Imig (2021) underscore the central role of the school leader during challenging situations by placing principals at the forefront of effecting considerable change for themselves, their staff, their institutions, and their educational systems. This aligns with the findings of Kaminskiene et al. (2021) that the leadership of the principals was one of the key factors when dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic and adapting to the new conditions of work it created for teachers and students. Further, multiple studies stress the importance of communication in times of crisis (Ahtiainen et al., 2024; Beauchamp et al., 2021; Brion and Kiral, 2021; Fletcher and Nicholas, 2016; Lenarduzzi, 2015; Reyes-Guerra et al., 2021; Striepe and Cunningham, 2022; Sutherland, 2017; Virella, 2023; Argyropoulou et al. (2021) call attention to the significance communication had during the COVID-19 crisis, while the findings of Thornton (2021b) highlight that effective communication is a key leadership strategy during crises.
To be true to core values and beliefs
During crises, it is vital that school leaders adhere closely to their core values and beliefs (Beauchamp et al., 2021; Howard and Dhillon, 2021; Longmuir, 2023; Menon, 2021; Pearce, 2023). The research conducted by Tarrant (2014) on a school tragedy underlines the important role of values in guiding the decision-making process during times of adversity. Sum (2022) stresses that principals need to “make rapid and significant decisions” in crisis situations. Direen (2017) states that one of the aspects of successful leadership in a crisis context is about maintaining a strong link to one's core beliefs and values as a school leader. Importantly, findings from the work of Menon (2021) highlight the use of moral values as a framework for decisions and actions during a financial crisis in Greece. Similarly, Striepe and Cunningham (2022) report that one crucial characteristic of leadership during a crisis is complex decision-making. This view aligns with that of Sum (2022), who highlights the principal and how they need to make rapid, difficult, and significant decisions in crisis contexts.
Collaboration as a strategy
School leadership tends to make good use of collaboration, teamwork, and networking during crises. Multiple studies have reported the magnitude of the collaboration that occurs during times of crisis (e.g. Argyropoulou et al., 2021; Hayes and Derrington, 2023; Lien et al., 2023; Lucena Rodriguez et al., 2022; Norberg and Gross, 2019; Notman, 2015; Pearce, 2023; Steilen and Stone-Johnson, 2023; Sum, 2022; Sutherland, 2017; Thornton, 2021a; Watson and Singh, 2022). Similarly, Brion and Kiral (2021) focus on the importance of creating a sense of belonging among school members during crises. Additionally, Menon (2021) stresses that principals should adopt more collaborative methods of decision-making and focus on greater interaction between school and home as well as promote greater collaboration among stakeholders.
The need for care and support
There is an emphasis on emotional intelligence in the context of crises in educational leadership research. Argyropoulou et al. (2021) describe the extended utilization of professional emotional intelligence to collectively process in difficult and complex environments. Beauchamp et al. (2021) report that “within their schools, the values, attitudes and moral imperatives of headteachers invoked a strong sense of emotional leadership of all members of the school community.” This aligns with the claim made by Grissom and Condon (2021) that emotional intelligence is one of three sets of competencies that school leaders need to hone for effective crisis management. Moreover, Reyes-Guerra et al. (2021) and Thornton (2021a) state that leadership qualities and capacities, such as demonstrating empathy and care and prioritizing the well-being of all stakeholders, are crucial during a crisis. The importance of leaders being caring has also been highlighted in multiple other studies (Ahtiainen et al., 2024; Hayes and Derrington, 2023; Longmuir, 2023; Steilen and Stone-Johnson, 2023; Stripe and Cunningham, 2022). Watson and Singh (2022) state that “being emotionally intelligent as a leader has shown to be a key factor in being able to manage in a crisis.” The findings of Ramos-Pla et al. (2021) indicate that emotional intelligence is the most used personal leadership resource when dealing with a crisis.
Effective roles and actions principals engage in during a crisis
In times of crisis, principals work in demanding and challenging work environments. The research conducted by Stuart et al. (2013) on school leadership during a natural disaster and a pandemic describes the work environment for principals as being complex and difficult, which can impact student well-being.
Leading under pressure with competing demands
Drysdale and Gurr (2017) describe a crisis as a time of great change, complexity, and uncertainty. In a similar vein, Ahlström et al. (2020) state that one of the major challenges for principals is the constant state of uncertainty that they have to face. Menon (2021) describes periods of heavy workloads and great demands caused by the situation that they were dealing with. The study conducted by Spyropoulou and Koutroukis (2021) found that principals were required to respond to an unprecedented crisis, dealing with a variety of difficulties both on a personal and professional level, under tremendous pressure and with limited resources. One of the principals included in their study reported “many issues that had to be handled in a short time, demands for immediate response, requests from the ministry for issues that have not been prepared and many unanswered questions.” The studies of Steinsund and Eid (2023) and Kaminskiene et al. (2021) note that leading during crises often entails managing situations where information is limited or ambiguous.
To navigate and set direction
School leaders play a central role and face multiple challenges when dealing with organizational turbulence. One of the principals in the study conducted by Steinsund and Eid (2023) stated, “Actually, now is the time at which I am needed the most.” The findings of Drysdale and Gurr (2017) highlight seven key domains for school leaders that are critical for dealing with complexity and change: understanding the context, setting a direction for developing the organization, cultivating people, improving teaching and learning, influencing, and leading self. Another critical function of the school leader during a crisis is communicating effectively, honestly, and in a timely manner (Hebert et al., 2023; Howard and Dhillon, 2021; Kaminskiene et al., 2021; Longmuir, 2023; Potter et al., 2021). The research carried out by Brown (2018) on youth violence reveals that making quick decisions, appropriately managing volunteers, assisting staff, students, and parents are significant functions of the principal during a crisis. As pointed out by Ahlström et al. (2020), principals may have to deal with pupils, staff members, and parents’ anxiety during turbulent times.
Adapt but still provide stability
School leaders are expected to both navigate and adapt to the new environments created by crises. Norberg and Gross (2019) discuss the challenges associated with adjusting organizations to enable them to fulfill their responsibilities during difficult times. School leaders must “adjust and, at the same time, maintain stability” in the organization. It has also been noted by Dunn (2020) and Bagwell (2020) that leaders need to adapt to context-specific situations and that complex landscapes demand a more adaptive way of thinking. Navigating through the various tensions that arise during a crisis has also been reported as one of the greatest challenges of dealing with such situations (Argyropoulou et al., 2021; Gurr and Drysdale, 2020; Netolicky, 2020).
Building trust through shared leadership
Building trust and collaboration can be crucial for managing uncertainty. Ahlström et al. (2020) claim that trust is one of the most important aspects that need to be managed during crises. Their findings indicate that principals who can build collective trust possess the basic prerequisites for building organizations that can reliably fulfill their obligations. Further, Sutherland (2017) underlines the importance of trust in organizations in which the purpose is to learn and grow together. He asks the question, “Can leaders call communities to focus on their collective identity and to learn again how to work together?” The work of Netolicky (2020) as well as Howard and Dhillon (2021) emphasize a focus on the collective when navigating crises. Howard and Dhillon (2021) stress that educational leaders should foster collaboration, partnerships, and shared decision-making, especially during times of turbulence.
Discussion
Our analysis of literature on principal leadership, particularly during crises, highlights four key dilemmas: (1) whether to prioritize individual power and responsibility over shared leadership, (2) whether to render care and support or strictly fulfill managerial duties, (3) whether to be true to one's core values and beliefs or respond quickly and make hasty decisions, and (4) whether to give up control or provide stability amid constant uncertainty. These dilemmas are explored through the lens of educational leadership as an individual, collective, and relational practice, emphasizing collaboration as a strategy for managing complex challenges. The emphasis on the dilemma aspect was selected for discussion because it offers actionable insights that can guide leadership training and policy development (Table 4).
Overview of the dilemmas that school leaders face during a crisis.
Balancing individual power and responsibility and shared leadership
Complex social circumstances demand new ways of thinking and working. Educational leadership can be said to have the potential to influence others and make an impact (e.g. Ball, 2012; Firestone and Rihel, 2005; Gunter, 2004; Leithwood, 2005; Leithwood et al., 2008).
The findings obtained through our review stress the importance of the role of school leadership when dealing with crises, and multiple studies underscore that the principal serves a key function when navigating previously unknown situations (e.g. Fletcher and Nicholas, 2016; Kaminskiene et al., 2021; Thornton, 2021a). Kaminskiene et al. (2021) found that principals are central when leading their schools through complexity and that they benefit from addressing challenges collectively by drawing on the collective knowledge of their staff. The authors also highlight that shared responsibility is crucial for the overall well-being of both school leaders and their staff during complex situations. The duties of the school leader include mobilizing and empowering teams as well as facilitating collaboration to find effective solutions to the problems being faced.
Beauchamp et al. (2021) found that the perceptions of power and authority in the organization change during crises. They describe the principal as being central to leading the school through a crisis, emphasizing the importance of effectively leveraging the strengths of the staff. The authors also found that schools worked in a more humane way compared to normal environments. Staff members trusted each other more and responsibility was delegated to a greater extent. As reported by Sørhaug (1996), leadership can be seen as both an individual and a collective practice, and the principal can exercise influence in the organization by building knowledge and collaborating with others within the organization (Leithwood et al., 2008).
Legitimacy of the leader is often threatened during crises, making it fundamental to build collective trust among all stakeholders. The findings obtained through our review indicate that collaboration, sincerity, and transparency in decision-making build collective trust amid difficult situations (e.g. Bishop et al., 2015; Direen, 2017; Notman, 2015). In challenging and constantly changing environments, it is essential to devise new ways to work and cooperate. Both the individual and the collective way of performing tasks must be adjusted during crises.
Educational leaders are role models and are at the forefront of all changes (Ball, 2012). They are crucial for setting the direction of their organizations and conveying the attitudes that they adopt. Hence, by working in teams and networks to solve problems, determine vital solutions, and move in the same direction, a principal can build collective trust in their school community. Amid crises, it is crucial that school leaders find a balance between exercising individual power and facilitating collaboration with their organizations.
Balancing the relational aspect with operational expectations
Previous studies have found that crises impact principals on both a personal and a professional level (e.g., Agyropoulou et al., 2021; Lenarduzzi, 2015; Notman, 2015). Crises are experienced as demanding, stressful, and chaotic situations by school leaders and induce new ways of thinking. Hence, commonality, relations, and affiliation are significant aspects of education leadership (Crow and Møller, 2017; Gunter and Courtney, 2021).
Argyropoulou et al. (2021) highlight the fact that principals are required to cope with both managerial and emotional problems during a crisis. They emphasize human interaction and the relational element as well as the extended use of emotional intelligence during difficult times. To ensure that the provision of education continues and that everyone moves on from the crisis together, communication, encouragement, and support are critical. Hence, the expression of empathy and care and working for the students’ and staff's well-being have been emphasized in multiple studies (e.g. Ahtiainen et al., 2024; Bagwell, 2020; Fletcher and Nicholas, 2016; Thornton, 2021a).
Furthermore, school leaders are expected to fulfill managerial duties, such as making decisions on the spot, maintaining school operations, devising short-term action plans, and engaging in problem-solving. Other examples can be found in the findings of Lenarduzzi (2015), who examines working relationships in emotionally charged environments. Findings from past research also suggest that collaborative professional relationships and support networks are fundamental during crises (e.g. Direen, 2017; Thornton, 2021a; Watson and Singh, 2022). Lenarduzzi (2015) describes a complex professional dilemma wherein principals are supposed to provide support and care for their staff, students, and families while simultaneously being expected to manage multiple operational tasks. The author suggests dialogue as a way of building understanding, solutions, and consensus. This aligns with the results of Steilen and Stone-Johnson (2023) that underscore communication as the factor that governs the practice of the ethics of care.
Our review found that principals that promoted affiliation, commonality, and a sense of belonging had a positive impact on their organizations during crises. Our findings indicate that crises have both personal and professional implications for school leaders and that they must strike a balance between providing care and support to their staff, students, and families and fulfilling their operational duties.
Balancing individual and collective decision making
School leadership during crises is about making rapid and critical decisions regarding dilemmas that do not have clear answers or obvious solutions. During a crisis, the leader of a school shoulders an increased and extended responsibility, and the principal is responsible for making decisions that can have profound consequences for individuals in their school community.
This literature review revealed that complex decision-making is pivotal during crises (e.g. Menon, 2021; Striepe and Cunningham, 2022; Stuart et al., 2013; Tarrant, 2014). This places emphasis on the significant ethical and moral responsibility of the school leader and addresses the need to consider the ethical aspects of school leadership. Furthermore, it has been stated that the principal can be considered the moral compass that guides the school community through a crisis (e.g. Beauchamp et al., 2021; Drysdale and Gurr, 2017). The findings from the study conducted by Tarrant (2014) on a school tragedy underscore the significance of the values and school culture that guide the leadership's decisions and courses of action during a crisis. The principal in the study consistently acted on personal and organizational values when engaging in critical decision making.
The findings of Howard and Dhillon (2021), for instance, address the “swift and sudden” change that school leaders face during turbulent times as well as the challenge of responding quickly while simultaneously making careful and well-thought-out decisions. This aligns with the observations of Stuart et al. (2013), which indicate that urgent situations caused the principal to take immediate and decisive decisions in the face of an unknown situation. However, the findings of Striepe and Cunningham (2022) suggest that collaboration and shared decision-making result in the successful navigation of crises. These authors point out that making decisions during a crisis is about striking a delicate balance between fast decision-making and considering pressing needs, which rarely resembles normal day-to-day decision-making processes. Hence, shared responsibility through cooperation and collectively generating solutions can be helpful for school leaders.
As reported by Spillane and Lowenhaupt (2019), the complexity of managing dilemmas as a school leader can be overwhelming, and a strategy to cope with this is to engage the members of the organization and determine solutions collectively. Nevertheless, principals may have to find a balance between taking individual decisions and allowing others in their organization to participate in the decision-making process.
Balancing the loss of control and to provide stability amid constant uncertainty
During complex crises, school leaders need to navigate unfamiliar and unknown territory. At such times, everyone in the school community will experience insecurity and uncertainty, and the demands and expectations for the school leader are tremendous. Principals experience considerable pressure and stress, as they often face ambiguity, conflicting demands, and, thereby, difficulties related to prioritization. Moreover, previous studies reveal that school leaders are responsible for a more extensive range of actions during crises than when things are normal (Brown et al., 2021; Dunn, 2020). Regardless, one of the main functions of educational leadership is to set the direction for the organization (Leithwood, 2021).
Multiple studies analyzed in this review state that communication is a crucial strategy for leading an organization through a crisis. The findings of Steinsund and Eid. (2023) highlight the importance of information management and conveying understandable, accurate, and specific information about the situation to relieve the pressure experienced by the staff. This was found to have a calming effect on the school amid uncertainties. The authors also found that the principals’ ability to remain calm and focused and find ways of coping with a crisis was of great significance. This aligns with the claim of Ahlström et al. (2020) that principals must find strategies to handle uncertainty when leading their schools through a crisis. However, school leaders should find a balance between the need to provide stability and predictability in the organization during a crisis and accepting the loss of control due to constant uncertainty.
Summarizing the central dilemmas
As an illustration of the summary of this discussion, we have presented the four dilemmas in a figure (Figure 1) to elucidate a typology that consists of overarching, but central dilemmas faced by school leadership when dealing with crises.
A typology of the dilemmas faced by school leadership when dealing with crises.
Concluding remarks
This literature review aimed to identify the dilemmas school leaders face during crises, the characteristics of a school-level crisis, the challenges principals encounter during a crisis, and the effective roles and actions principals engage in during a crisis. Findings show that crises in schools are typically sudden and unexpected, requiring immediate action. School leaders are crucial in directing their organizations through crises, needing specific attributes, competencies, and skills for effective management. Essential values guide decision-making, and collaboration is key to building trust and sharing responsibility when addressing complex challenges. In summary, this study highlights the importance of managing dilemmas in school leadership during crises and underscores the need to investigate relational practices, decision-making processes, and issues of individual power and trust.
Limitations
One limitation of literature reviews is the potential for bias due to omitted literature and unchallenged validity of statements. Authors may also select works aligning with their worldview (Grant and Booth, 2009). Cohen et al. (2018) note that content analysis can be influenced by researchers’ perspectives and limited context understanding, potentially imposing unintended meanings. While our review is comprehensive, additional, database searches and including gray literature could have provided further relevant insights and reduced biases.
Implications and future research
Our findings indicate that policy must acknowledge the nuanced challenges of school leadership during crises, necessitating strategic support for principals. Decision-makers and local authorities should formulate guidelines that assist in managing competing demands effectively. Establishing sustainable structures, such as crisis management teams that include diverse school professionals, can promote shared responsibility and diverse perspectives in decision-making. Additionally, enhancing principal preparedness through targeted training programs focused on dilemma management is essential. Such programs should aim to strengthen decision-making skills and include role-playing or simulation exercises to practice responding to high-pressure situations. Future research should delve into the roles and power dynamics within schools during crises through in-depth case studies that incorporate interviews and observations. This approach can shed light on how leadership is enacted and practiced, how decision-making processes evolve, and how cooperation structures shift in crisis situations. By focusing on these aspects, researchers can gain valuable insights into the challenges and adaptations schools undergo, ultimately informing more effective crisis management strategies and leadership practices.
Footnotes
Declaration of conflicting interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
