Grow to lead: The case of Cyprus primary schools

Abstract

Leadership development is a critical but underexplored dimension of primary education. While extensive research has examined leadership in secondary and higher education contexts, the pathways through which leadership capacities are nurtured among primary educators remain less comprehended. This study explores the experiences of primary school teachers as they aspire a leadership development journey. Guided by their leadership identity development, the research adopts a qualitative approach, drawing on semi-structured interviews with 15 aspiring teachers across a range of primary schools. This paper's analysis revealed four key factors influencing leadership growth: the importance of mentorship, the navigation of school cultures, access to professional development, and the formation of leadership confidence. Findings highlight the central role of relational support and reflective practice in cultivating leadership potential. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of leadership formation at the foundational stages of education and offers practical implications for schools seeking to nurture leadership capacity among their teaching staff, and it calls for more structured leadership development pathways within primary schools and greater attention to early leadership identity formation in educational leadership discourse.

Introduction

The development of effective leadership in education has long been acknowledged as a principal component of school improvement and student success (Leithwood et al., 2019). While leadership in the Cypriot primary school context has received growing attention in recent decades, there remains limited understanding of how leadership emerges and evolves among primary school teachers themselves, particularly within everyday instructional and organisational practices. Recent research in the last 20 years or so has explored leadership roles among headteachers and teachers; however, less is known about how leadership is enacted informally by classroom teachers and how such practices are shaped by institutional and policy constraints. While substantial research has been devoted to leadership roles held by senior staff or headteachers, there is a growing need to examine how leadership identities form and evolve from the onset of a teaching career (Day and Sammons, 2013). In this context, the present article aims to explore the personal, institutional, and systemic influences that shape the leadership journeys of primary school teachers who aspire leadership positions in Cyprus.

Modern education systems increasingly emphasise the importance of distributed leadership; a concept that recognises leadership as a shared, relational process rather than a formal position (Harris, 2004; Spillane, 2006) and this is supported in the belief that empowering teachers at all levels to lead contributes not only to improved instructional practice but also to school innovation and resilience (Fullan, 2001). However, despite its potential, teachers often encounter limited opportunities to lead due to institutional hierarchies, cultural expectations, and lack of confidence (Bush, 2018). This, unfortunately, creates a puzzle where teachers are expected to be proactive change facilitators while at the same time navigating systems that may not support or validate their leadership potential.

The focus on teachers who aspire leadership is particularly important for several reasons. The induction period is a formative stage during which educators internalise their professional identity, including their self-efficacy, autonomy, and sense of agency (Bandura, 1997; Hobson et al., 2009). Their professional experiences during this phase can significantly influence whether a teacher can improve the capacity and willingness to aspire or enact to leadership positions later in their teaching career (Karamanidou and Bush, 2017). When leadership is positioned as an exclusive domain of experienced staff, it may discourage new teachers from aspiring to leadership roles, thus weakening long-term succession planning and innovation capacity within schools (Ingersoll and Strong, 2011).

The global policy landscape has intensified demands on teachers to lead from within the classroom and beyond, and initiatives such as instructional leadership, professional learning communities, and school-led system reform rely on the notion that all teachers, regardless of title, can lead pedagogical change (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). However, these expectations are infrequently matched by targeted professional development (PD) or mentoring that supports the cultivation of leadership competencies. The importance of mentoring and coaching in supporting leadership development has also gained prominence in the literature, and as Fletcher and Mullen (2012) argue, mentoring relationships, particularly when reciprocal and reflective, can play a pivotal role in shaping leadership identity (Karamanidou and Bush, 2017). These interactions help aspiring teachers to understand these roles more meticulously, articulate their values, and practice leadership in a more supportive environment. However, as Cordingley et al. (2015) note, mentoring is often inconsistently implemented and lacks a leadership development focus, which limits its potential impact.

A further barrier to leadership development lies in school culture (Karamanidou and Bush, 2017) as it nurtures or hinders leadership growth depending on its openness to innovation, collaboration, and distributed power (Goleman et al., 2002). In schools where leadership is narrowly defined or dominated by formal roles, teachers may struggle to perceive themselves or to be considered as potential future leaders (Thorpe and Karamanidou, 2024), and equally, inclusive and empowering school environments can enable novice aspiring teachers to actively participate in decision-making and lead initiatives aligned with their interests and expertise.

The present study is situated in this intersection of personal motivation, institutional support, and systemic opportunity, and its purpose is to explore how primary school teachers in Cyprus perceive, aspire, experience, and enact leadership within their schools. The research questions guiding this inquiry are:

How do teachers perceive leadership in the context of primary education?

What personal and contextual factors contribute to or inhibit their leadership development?

How do school structures and cultures shape the emergence of leadership identities among aspiring teachers?

In what ways do mentorship, school culture, and PD opportunities influence early leadership identity formation among primary school teachers?

The study aims to contribute to a better understanding of leadership development in primary education in Cyprus. It recognises that leadership does not emerge in isolation but is embedded within the lived experiences, challenges, and relationships of teaching professionals. This research also seeks to inform school leadership practices and policy frameworks by highlighting the specific needs and perspectives of primary school teachers in Cyprus. The study adopts a qualitative methodology, drawing questions, that will enable participants to capture their everyday experiences. This approach is well-suited to exploring identity, sense-making, and personal growth that all are central to the phenomenon of leadership development (Clandinin and Connelly, 2000; Karamanidou and Bush, 2017). Participants were invited to reflect on their professional journeys, offering insight into the pivotal moments, relationships, and institutional dynamics that shaped their leadership identity and helped them aspire leadership positions. It is framed by the belief that every teacher has leadership potential, and that realising this potential requires support, inclusive school cultures, and PD systems that extend beyond mere instructional improvement (Karamanidou and Bush, 2017). As education systems constantly grapple with evolving expectations, workforce sustainability, and equity, understanding how leadership takes root in their career is both timely and essential (Bush, 2018).

Literature review

Recent literature on leadership development in education has increasingly emphasised the complexity and multi-dimensionality of leadership formation, particularly among teachers (Day and Sammons, 2013; Harris, 2004; Kelchtermans, 2022; Leithwood et al., 2020; Wenner and Campbell, 2017). The literature review of the present paper synthesises key themes, models, and findings relevant to the journey of leadership development within primary education, with particular attention to teachers.

Conceptualising leadership in education

Leadership in education has evolved from a focus on formal positions of authority to broader and more inclusive understandings, incorporating distributed, instructional, and teacher leadership. Hallinger and Murphy's foundational work (1985, 1987) remains highly influential in conceptualising instructional leadership as a key domain of school improvement, where leadership is centred around curriculum, pedagogy, and school culture. Hallinger (2021) later argues for the contextualisation of leadership models to reflect cultural and systemic variations, a point especially pertinent to small-state contexts like Cyprus.

Building on this, Spillane's (2006) theory of distributed leadership emphasises that leadership practice is ‘stretched over’ individuals, artefacts, and routines. This reconceptualisation enables non-positional leadership, teachers leading through practice, collaboration, and pedagogical influence (Thorpe and Karamanidou, 2024; Wenner and Campbell, 2017). Brundrett and Crawford (2008) further assert that successful school leadership development requires systems to move beyond charismatic, individual-centred models and instead embrace capacity-building across schools and leadership teams. Their comparative work stresses the value of developing coherent leadership frameworks that align leadership aspirations with opportunity structures, insight particularly relevant in decentralised or fragmented education systems.

Teacher leadership, becomes an essential but often overlooked component of whole-school leadership strategy. York-Barr and Duke (2004) define teacher leadership as a process by which classroom educators, through expertise and relational influence, lead improvements in pedagogy and student learning. Research continues to affirm that when teacher leadership is cultivated through supportive conditions, it positively influences student achievement, school innovation, and professional morale (Karamanidou and Bush, 2017). However, realising this potential depends on more than ideology, it requires cultural, institutional, and structural commitment.

Early-Career teacher development and identity formation

The formation of a teacher's leadership identity begins early in their professional journey. Kelchtermans (2022) frames identity as a dynamic construct shaped by personal narrative, social interaction, and contextual pressures. This aligns with Komives et al.'s (2005) leadership identity development model, which conceptualises leadership as a relational and developmental process that evolves through increasing complexity, responsibility, and reflection. Early-career teachers experience a formative tension between their emerging self-concept and institutional expectations, making this stage particularly sensitive for intentional leadership cultivation (Mansfield et al., 2016). Hallinger and Murphy's (1985, 1987) foundational work on instructional leadership highlights that the development of leadership capacity is not confined to formal roles, but embedded in teachers’ engagement with curriculum, teaching, and school vision. They argue that leadership effectiveness often begins with a strong pedagogical core, particularly relevant in primary education where the instructional focus is intense and central to school improvement. Their work underscores the importance of building early leadership potential through structured opportunities that link instructional expertise with broader leadership behaviours.

Support structures such as mentoring and coaching are central to this formation. Hobson and Maxwell (2020) advocate for emotionally responsive and dialogical mentoring that acknowledges the novice teacher's evolving identity and leadership potential. Karamanidou and Bush (2017) add that when mentorship is explicitly aligned with leadership development, it equips early-career teachers with the language, confidence, and social capital needed to transition into more formal or distributed leadership roles. Brundrett and Crawford (2008) further reinforce the international perspective by asserting that leadership development should be a continuous, system-supported process rather than dependent on individual initiative or school-level chance. Their comparative study stresses the need for structured national frameworks that identify, support, and nurture leadership potential from early career stages. Without such frameworks, they argue, leadership development remains uneven, especially in schools where mentoring, culture, or leadership structures are less robust. This aligns with the current study's emphasis on equity and opportunity in cultivating leadership among primary school teachers, particularly in small-state systems like Cyprus.

Professional development and leadership readiness

High-quality PD is a foundation for leadership readiness and growth and research conducted by Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) recognises key features of effective PD. These key features include areas that must be sustained, collaborative, subject-specific, and, crucially, embedded in practice. PD that incorporates leadership training, such as project-based leadership, curriculum coordination, or coaching, helps early-career leaders gain practical experience and develop confidence in leading others (Thorpe and Karamanidou, 2024).

More recent studies emphasise the necessity of leadership pathways tailored to the needs of school teachers (Thorpe and Karamanidou, 2024). For example, initiatives that enable early career school leaders to lead professional learning communities or school improvement projects can accelerate leadership capacity. However, access to these opportunities often depends on the proactiveness of leaders and the availability of resources, and despite growing advocacy for inclusive leadership, structural and perceptual barriers persist. It is often reported that limited self-sufficiency, indistinct pathways to leadership, and an understanding that leadership is reserved for more experienced educators (Muijs et al., 2006). These beliefs can create internalised limitations, reducing self-efficacy and willingness to pursue leadership roles (Tschannen-Moran and Hoy, 2007).

Pashiardis et al. (2014) highlight the importance of creating systematic leadership preparation programmes that are context-sensitive and aligned with national education policies. He supports and acknowledges that leadership development must go beyond skills achievement and instead cultivate a leadership identity ingrained in values, vision, and strategic thinking. His research underscores the role of PD in cultivating reflective practitioners who engage in distributed leadership and transformational practices (Pashiardis et al., 2018). According to Pashiardis (2011) effective PD also hinges on the presence of leadership networks and mentoring structures that can guide teachers who aspire leadership through the complex realities of school leadership. Additionally, gender, race, and socioeconomic background intersect with leadership opportunity, often result in underrepresentation and unequal support structures (Lumby, 2018). In the primary education sector, where the workforce is often predominantly female, yet senior roles are disproportionately male, these dynamics raise concerns about equity in leadership development identity (Karamanidou and Bush, 2017). Pashiardis (2011) also draws to the cultural and systemic factors influencing leadership access, encouraging for a more equitable and inclusive framework that supports diverse leadership trajectories.

The school's relational and cultural environment plays a critical role in enabling or inhibiting leadership development. Research by Gronn (2002) and Leithwood et al. (2020) demonstrates that inclusive, collaborative cultures promote shared leadership and foster conditions where teacher leadership can flourish. In contrast, rigid hierarchies and leadership monopolies constrain ambition, limit voice, and reinforce professional stagnation. Pashiardis (2011) emphasises that school culture must reflect national education goals and be responsive to context-specific leadership needs, a point that reinforces the value of system-wide coherence. For primary school teachers, inclusion in decision-making processes, visibility within the school community, and recognition from leaders all contribute to the development of leadership identity. As Brundrett and Crawford (2008) argue, professional learning cultures that value distributed leadership must be intentional in creating space for emerging leaders to contribute meaningfully.

Leadership development must also be addressed at the policy level. Pashiardis et al. (2014, 2018) stress that systemic leadership preparation programmes must align with national frameworks, be context-sensitive, and focus on long-term identity formation. They argue for a move beyond competencies and managerialism toward a leadership paradigm based on vision, ethics, and strategic capacity. Equity remains a pressing concern, and Lumby (2018) and Karamanidou and Bush (2017) have highlighted persistent gender imbalances in school leadership, particularly in contexts where the teaching profession is feminised but leadership remains male-dominated. A more inclusive policy approach must acknowledge how factors such as gender, class, and ethnicity intersect with leadership opportunity and support structures. Hallinger and Murphy's (1985, 1987) foundational work on leadership development reinforces this view by emphasising that effective school leadership must be fostered within a broader systemic infrastructure that connects instructional leadership to broader school improvement goals. Their model, which integrates leadership functions such as defining the school mission, managing the instructional programme, and promoting a positive school learning climate, has significantly influenced leadership policy design in diverse international contexts. It underscores the importance of preparing leaders who can bridge classroom practice and strategic school-wide direction, an especially critical consideration in primary education systems where leadership structures are often less formalised. In parallel, Brundrett and Crawford (2008) argue for a more coordinated, policy-driven approach to school leadership development that supports consistency and equity. Drawing from comparative studies across the UK and other systems, they highlight that fragmented or ad hoc leadership preparation risks reinforcing inequalities and missing opportunities to identify and nurture potential leaders early in their careers. Their call for structured national leadership pathways, clear role expectations, and targeted professional learning opportunities is particularly relevant to small-state systems like Cyprus, where systemic coherence and strategic planning can have outsized effects on leadership pipelines.

Gaps in the current literature

The reviewed literature affirms that school leadership that aligns with the demands of the educational changes is expected for educational improvement (Fullan, 2001; Leithwood et al., 2019). Key enablers involve supportive school cultures, structured mentoring, inclusive PD, and systemic recognition of teacher agency. Nonetheless, several gaps remain: there is limited research tracing leadership identity over time, and few studies offer in-depth qualitative insights into the lived experiences of primary teachers (Wenner and Campbell, 2017; Karamanidou and Bush, 2017).

However, notable gaps remain, and there is limited research that longitudinally explores leadership identity development from the perspective of primary school teachers. Similarly, there is a scarcity of in-depth qualitative studies that capture the lived experiences of aspiring primary school leaders in smaller or non-Anglophone education systems. This study aims to address these omissions by examining how primary teachers in Cyprus understand, experience, and engage with leadership, contributing to both the local discourse and the broader international debate on equitable, distributed, and identity-based leadership development.

Methodology

A qualitative research design was employed to gain rich, contextualised insights into how leadership identity develops among early-career primary school teachers in Cyprus. This approach was chosen to capture the nuanced experiences, perceptions, and aspirations of participants, which are essential to understanding the relational and situated nature of leadership growth in educational settings. The study is grounded in Leadership Identity Development Theory (Komives et al., 2005), which conceptualises leadership not as a fixed trait but as an evolving process influenced by personal, relational, and contextual factors. This framework was instrumental in guiding both data collection and analysis, enabling the exploration of how leadership identities form, shift, and are supported or constrained within school environments.

Research Questions

How do teachers perceive leadership in the context of primary education?

What personal and contextual factors contribute to or inhibit their leadership development?

How do school structures and cultures shape the emergence of leadership identities among aspiring teachers?

In what ways do mentorship, school culture, and PD opportunities influence early leadership identity formation among primary school teachers?

Participants, sampling, and data collection

Fifteen early-career primary school teachers (within their first five years of service) participated in the study, who all had expressed an interest in pursuing future leadership roles. A purposive sampling strategy was employed to recruit participants from a range of primary schools across Cyprus, with attention to variation in school size (small rural schools to larger urban ones), geographic location, and socio-economic contexts. Participants included 10 female and five male teachers, reflecting the gender distribution typical of the Cypriot primary teaching workforce. Most participants held at least a bachelor's degree in education, and four were concurrently pursuing or had completed postgraduate qualifications related to educational leadership or pedagogy.

While the sample size is appropriate for in-depth qualitative analysis, it is important to note that certain participant characteristics, such as gender, educational attainment, and school setting, may have influenced their perceptions and experiences. For instance, participants from larger urban schools described more formalised leadership structures and access to mentoring, while those from smaller rural schools reported more fluid, informal leadership opportunities. Similarly, teachers with postgraduate study backgrounds appeared more confident in articulating their leadership aspirations, possibly reflecting a greater exposure to leadership discourse.

Data were collected via semi-structured interviews, each lasting 45–60 min, conducted in person and guided by a protocol designed to explore participants’ lived experiences with leadership, perceived barriers and enablers, and future aspirations. Interviews were audio-recorded with consent, transcribed verbatim, and anonymised to protect participant confidentiality. Recruitment was facilitated through school leadership teams and professional networks, with all participants providing informed consent.

Data analysis, ethical considerations and trustworthiness

Data were analysed using Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase thematic analysis framework, which supports a systematic, flexible, and reflexive engagement with qualitative data. The analysis began with familiarisation, during which the researcher repeatedly read each transcript and wrote reflective notes to gain an initial understanding of participants’ leadership experiences and perceptions. Transcripts were then imported into a manual coding system and coded line-by-line using a combination of in vivo coding, capturing participants’ actual language, and descriptive codes that summarised key ideas or processes. Initial codes were generated inductively and independently of the research questions to avoid premature thematisation. These were then clustered into meaningful categories representing early patterns in the data (e.g., challenges, mentoring, confidence). Candidate themes were developed from these categories, tested across multiple transcripts, and refined in a recursive manner, moving back and forth between data and emerging themes to check for coherence, distinctiveness, and alignment with the theoretical framework.

This iterative process led to the generation of final themes, such as the ones that will be discussed in the next section. These themes were then mapped against the research questions to ensure analytical relevance and narrative clarity. Analytical memos were written throughout to capture evolving interpretations, identify areas of tension or contradiction, and reflect critically on the researcher's assumptions. This continuous analytic journaling also supported deeper reflexivity, particularly in ensuring that the interpretation remained grounded in participants’ lived experiences.

Interpretive decisions were further informed by Komives et al.'s (2005) Leadership Identity Development model, which helped guide the lens through which leadership was conceptualised, not as a static outcome but as a relational process shaped over time. This theoretical grounding enabled the researcher to draw nuanced links between individual narratives and broader themes of leadership formation, confidence, and professional growth, helping to substantiate the conclusions presented in the discussion. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the relevant institutional research ethics committee, and informed consent was secured in writing prior to interviews. Participants were informed of their right to withdraw at any point without consequence, and pseudonyms were assigned, and all identifying information was anonymised in the transcription process. Interview recordings and transcripts were stored securely on encrypted, password-protected devices.

To establish credibility, a combination of member checking and peer debriefing was employed, and participants were invited to review their transcripts and comment on initial thematic summaries to ensure accurate representation of their experiences. Transferability was supported by the inclusion of thick, contextualised descriptions of participants, school settings, and the national policy context of Cyprus, consistent with Bush's (2007) emphasis on culturally situated leadership research. Dependability and confirmability were addressed through an audit trail that documented the entire analytic process, from coding decisions to theme refinement. Reflexive notes were maintained to acknowledge the influence of the researcher's professional background and positionality throughout interpretation. Following Bush and Glover (2014), particular attention was paid to aligning data analysis with the study's conceptual framework and maintaining methodological transparency.

Discussion of findings

The findings presented from the current study provide powerful and remarkable insights into the multilayered process of leadership aspiration and development among primary school teachers in Cyprus. Building on existing literature mentioned in this paper, around leadership, teacher identity formation, and professional learning, the findings and discussion explore the implications of the main themes identified and analysed above. Each theme is also supported with relevant theoretical frameworks to deepen understanding and inform future practice and policy. This section presents the key findings from semi-structured interviews conducted with 15 primary school teachers. Through thematic analysis, four overarching themes emerged that capture the participants’ experiences: (1) navigating school cultures, (2) the power of mentorship, (3) building leadership confidence, and (4) accessing PD opportunities. These themes reflect both the support and barriers encountered by teachers in their years of practice as they begin to form their leadership identity.

Navigating school cultures

The influence of school culture was developed as a foundational factor in shaping leadership aspiration and development, and the findings presented align with the work of Fullan (2001) and Leithwood et al. (2019), who support that school culture significantly affects the success of leadership initiatives. In schools with collaborative, inclusive cultures, leadership was perceived as accessible and distributed (Karamanidou and Bush, 2017). This view also supports Harri'’s (2004) model of distributed leadership, where leadership is seen as a collective activity rather than a top-down directive.

More recent studies strengthen this viewpoint, as for example, Liu (2024) highlights that a positive, trust-rich school culture fosters leadership agency and encourages participation across all staff, especially among teachers who aspire leadership. Similarly, Gulsen and Celik (2021) found that leadership development thrives in schools where relational trust, shared values, and reflective dialogue are embedded in the culture. Participants’ descriptions of exclusionary or hierarchical school environments reflect the persistent presence of traditional leadership models that obstruct the growth of aspiring leaders. Such cultures often limit leadership to formal roles, carelessly downgrading teachers who want to aspire to leadership positions. This resonates with findings from Day and Sammons (2013), and from Harris (2011), who emphasise the need for cultural change within schools to unlock the leadership potential of all staff and foster distributed, equity-driven leadership practices.

In practical terms, the findings from this study suggest that school leaders must critically assess the embedded messages expressed through organisational structures and daily interactions, and if primary school teachers are to perceive themselves as leaders, they must be rooted in a culture where leadership is democratised and easily accessible. As suggested by Pashiardis et al. (2018), leadership culture should be decisively nurtured through modelling, mentoring, and participation in real decision-making contexts, to ensure that leadership is a lived experience rather than a distant aspiration. Although these findings are situated in the Cypriot context, they reflect broader international trends. Similar tensions between hierarchical cultures and distributed leadership aspirations have been observed in England (Brundrett and Crawford, 2008) and across Mediterranean and post-colonial systems. This underscores a shared global challenge: cultivating inclusive school cultures that empower leadership from the bottom up.

School culture played a critical role in shaping how primary school teachers perceived and engaged in leadership, and the values, norms, and structures within schools often determined whether participants felt empowered or restricted in their leadership aspirations and development. Many participants (9) described environments where leadership was distributed and encouraged. More specifically, Participant 4 (P4) explained ‘in my school, leadership isn't just for people with titles. If you have an idea, you're supported to try it out. That made me feel like I had a voice, even in my second year of service’. Similarly, P9 also observed how inclusive leadership practices allowed her to step into informal roles, as it was mentioned that ‘I was asked to lead a reading initiative. It wasn’t a formal leadership role, but I had the opportunity to coordinate, present to other members of staff, and collect feedback. That really helped me built my confidence’.

In contrast, several participants (5) described hierarchical or rigid school cultures that limited their aspirations, even enactment opportunities. More specifically, P2 mentioned that ‘leadership feels like a closed club in my school. Unless you’re already in the senior team or very experienced, it's hard to get noticed’. This sense of exclusion was also echoed by P13, who stated that ‘everything is top-down. I suggested a few ideas to improve the homework policy, but it went nowhere. There was no space for the early career teachers to contribute’. These findings may imply that school culture can either nurture or stifle leadership potential, more particularly for those without any leadership titles. The presence of supportive leadership structures and an ethos of collaboration significantly influenced participants’ experiences.

The power of mentorship

Mentorship was revealed to be a cornerstone of leadership development in the present study, and this powerful role in shaping professional trajectories has been widely documented (Hobson et al., 2009; Ingersoll and Strong, 2011). However, this study uniquely emphasises mentorship as not only a support for teaching practice but as a vehicle for developing leadership identity during teachers’ professional pathway. This view is echoed by Karamanidou and Bush (2017), who argue that mentorship plays a crucial role in the professional socialisation of future leaders, particularly in centralised or hierarchical systems where informal guidance can serve as a key source of leadership learning. Similarly, Pashiardis et al. (2014) stress the value of mentorship within leadership preparation programmes, emphasising that authentic, context-sensitive mentoring relationships help bridge the gap between leadership theory and practice, cultivating reflective and values-driven leaders.

The distinction between formal and informal mentorship is particularly noteworthy, as informal mentorship relationships are mainly characterised by mutual respect, trust, and authentic dialogue, often filling the void left by inadequate or superficial formal structures. This reinforces Fletcher and Mullen's (2012) perception that mentorship should extend beyond technical support to include modelling of leadership behaviours and fostering critical reflection. Coleman (2005) also highlights the importance of informal mentorship, especially for underrepresented groups in leadership, noting that supportive informal relationships can empower emerging leaders in exclusionary cultures, like the Cypriot culture. Internationally, Hallinger and Murphy (1985, 1987) also highlight the need for mentorship structures that support leadership at both instructional and transformational levels, demonstrating how such support is necessary for systemic improvement. These findings suggest that mentorship must become a long-term, embedded practice in both school culture and policy, not just a transient, procedural obligation.

It is noteworthy to mention the absence or superficiality of mentoring in some cases highlighted systemic gaps in leadership preparation. Bush (2012) argues that leadership development must be deliberate and entrenched in the school culture, with mentoring positioned as a continuous, strategic activity rather than a short-term intervention. Schools that fail to prioritise mentorship unintentionally suppress leadership development among teachers, and it seems that embedding mentorship into the fabric of school life, beyond induction and into long-term career development, is a vital recommendation arising from this study.

Mentorship emerged as one of the most influential factors in early leadership development, and participants highlighted how both formal mentors and informal relationships helped them shape their confidence, decision-making, and sense of belonging and purpose as future school leaders. For some interviewees (6), assigned mentors provided consistent guidance. P6 shared that ‘my mentor was amazing. She didn't just help with teaching. She talked me through how to lead a team meeting, how to handle difficult conversations, and how to think like a leader’. Informal mentorships were also very powerful, as P12 described an experienced colleague who became a leadership role model as ‘he wasn’t my official mentor, but he treated me like a peer. He would simply ask for my input on projects and explain why certain leadership decisions were made. I learned so much just by watching him’.

However, some participants (5) noted a lack of structured mentoring in their schools, and as P5 explained ‘I had no mentor during my first year, and I really struggled with the everyday responsibilities. It felt like I was just trying to survive, not grow. Leadership wasn't even on my radar because no one talked about it’. Many (7) experienced inconsistent support, as P14 shared that ‘my mentor was often too busy to meet, and when we did talk, it was only about classroom management. Leadership never came up as a discussion topic’.

The data suggest that purposeful, consistent mentorship plays a critical role in nurturing and developing leadership identity. Where mentorship was absent or superficial, participants often felt disconnected from leadership pathways.

Building leadership confidence

The development of leadership confidence among the research participants was marked by incremental growth through recognition and experience. This reflects Bandura's (1997) theory of self-efficacy, which posits that confidence grows through mastery experiences, social persuasion, and the modelling of behaviour. Data from this research showed that participants who were given opportunities to lead even in small, informal ways did begin to develop a leadership identity. This mirrors the concept of leadership-as-practice supported by Spillane (2006), where leadership is found to be enacted in everyday interactions rather than confined to formal roles. Something else that was discussed by several participants (12) was the impostor syndrome, and as P8 mentioned, ‘it is important to identify the emotional complexities of identity transition from teacher to leader’. These valuable findings suggest that confidence-building should be a deliberate element of leadership development training, and as P3 mentioned, ‘schools can facilitate this through gradual exposure to leadership tasks, affirmational feedback from leaders, and reflective practices that will allow us teachers to make sense of their leadership experiences’. This theme resonates beyond Cyprus, as International literature (e.g., Brundrett and Crawford, 2008; Bush, 2012) similarly stresses the importance of building teacher confidence through structured support, coaching, and recognition of informal leadership acts. Supporting teachers to ‘see themselves as leaders’ early in their careers is not only a local imperative but a global one.

A recurring theme across all 15 interviews was the gradual development of leadership confidence, and almost all participants (14) described how specific experiences contributed to a shift in their self-perception from ‘just a teacher’ to someone capable of leading others. Leadership confidence is often developed through small, scaffolded opportunities, and as P7 noted ‘leading a staff workshop on science was terrifying at first. But after I did it, colleagues came to me for advice. That made me feel like maybe I could be a leader’. P1 similarly reflected on the impact of informal recognition ‘When my headteacher complimented my handling of a tricky situation with a parent meeting and recommended I consider a pastoral lead role, I started perceiving myself differently’.

On the other hand, many participants (7) struggled with impostor syndrome and as P10 explained ‘I keep thinking, ‘Who am I to lead?’ Most of the time, I feel like I’m still figuring things out myself’. This was also reflected on P8's response ‘even when I was asked to lead a curriculum review, I doubted whether others would take me seriously. It's hard to see yourself as a leader when you're still so new in the profession’. These reflections reveal that leadership confidence is not static; it evolves through affirmation, experience, and support. Primary school teachers need not only opportunities but also validation to internalise a leadership identity.

Accessing professional development opportunities

PD was a double-edged sword in the present study, as it offered powerful leadership learning for many participants (10) while remaining inaccessible or irrelevant for others (5). This variation reflects broader international concerns about the design and accessibility of PD of how leadership development is designed and delivered in primary schools. Darling-Hammond et al. (2017) support that effective PD is job-embedded, sustained, and aligned with teachers’ aspirations and this was also a view shared from P3, P6 and P11. In countries with mature leadership development frameworks, such as England and Singapore, targeted PD has been shown to accelerate leadership readiness (OECD, 2015; Hallinger and Lee, 2012). The findings from Cyprus highlight that PD is often still oriented around classroom practices, with little consideration for early-career leadership development. For leadership potential to be nurtured equitably, systems must intentionally widen access to PD that is flexible, strategic, and tailored to the realities of primary education.

Many participants (8) who attended leadership-focused PD described transformative experiences that shifted their career trajectories, and this was also reflected in P4, P6 and P11 responses. However, others (4) such as P3's response, mentioned a narrow focus on classroom practice, logistical barriers, or lack of support as limiting factors. P2, also mentioned that these accounts mirror criticisms in the literature that PD often fails to address the complexity of leadership (Cordingley et al., 2015). If schools and policymakers aim to nurture leadership from within, PD must be re-envisioned to incorporate leadership learning from the earliest stages of a teacher's career, many participants (12) shared. This comprises time-protected opportunities, a focus on relational and strategic competencies, and recognition of informal leadership as a legitimate focus of professional learning.

PD opportunities played a substantial role in shaping participants’ leadership aspirations and skills and many participants (11) reported mixed experiences, with access, quality, and importance varying considerably amongst schools. Some participants (6) gained lots of experience from targeted PD. P3 mentioned that ‘our school sent me on a “middle leadership essentials” course in my fourth year of service. It gave me tools to lead without feeling overwhelmed. It was a game-changer for my whole career as a teacher’. P11 echoed this perception, as ‘attending a local leadership conference opened my eyes to what's possible. I met other primary school teachers who were already leading projects. It made me think, “Why not me?”’.

However, others (7) noted a lack of PD geared towards early leadership. More specifically, P15 stated that ‘most PD is about literacy strategies or classroom management. There's nothing about how to lead, manage colleagues, or bring a change in the school environment’. P2 added that ‘I’ve had to find my own leadership training online. The school never really suggested anything and this is so disappointing as PD is vital for teachers’. Time constraints seemed to be a recurring barrier and as P10 explained ‘even when PD is offered, it's during school hours. It's hard to leave the classroom or find cover. That limits what we can take part in, even if we feel like it is a very important topic that will help us in our career’.

The data emphasises the importance of offering structured, accessible, and relevant leadership PD for primary school teachers and without all this, leadership aspiration for primary school teachers may remain untapped.

Implications for practitioners, researchers and policy makers

While each of the above data themes presents a distinct element of leadership development, they are deeply interwoven and mutually reinforcing. As P1 observed, a supportive school culture enabled mentorship to take root, which in turn fuelled confidence-building and encouraged leadership expression. P3 advanced this by highlighting that all these factors were either amplified or constrained by access to meaningful, well-designed PD. These insights resonate with the integrated models of leadership development advanced by scholars such as Hargreaves and Fullan (2012), who argue that sustainable leadership growth requires coherence between individual agency and systemic support.

The findings make clear that leadership development cannot be treated as a peripheral or one-off initiative (P5, P10, P12). Rather, it must be understood as an evolving and situated process, an interplay between structural, relational, and personal factors that together shape the emergence of leadership identity. As this study has shown, aspiring teacher-leaders grow not only through formal roles but through everyday interactions, recognition, and access to developmental experiences. Without these, early leadership identities can be stunted, marginalised, or prematurely abandoned.

Implications for practitioners

For school leaders and teachers, the study underscores the importance of intentionally cultivating inclusive school cultures that recognise and nurture informal leadership. Rather than reserving leadership opportunities for a select few, schools should democratise leadership practice by embedding it in the everyday fabric of school life. This can include revisiting hierarchical structures, creating collaborative decision-making spaces, and celebrating staff initiative (P4). Additionally, mentorship emerged as a vital yet underutilised tool. When approached as a long-term, relational process rather than a task-based pairing, mentorship can provide affirmation, modelling, and safe spaces for reflection, especially crucial for early-career teachers still forming their leadership identities (P9, P11, P15). Schools would benefit from investing in mentor training and creating protected time for mentoring relationships to flourish.

Implications for policymakers

The findings also point to important considerations for policymakers, as current leadership development frameworks in Cyprus appear to concentrate support and funding around formal leadership roles, which inadvertently reinforces exclusionary patterns. Fourteen out of 15 participants noted that access to leadership training and opportunities was often linked to seniority or title rather than aspiration or potential. Policy interventions should aim to disrupt this by broadening eligibility for leadership-focused CPD and embedding distributed leadership principles in national policy. For example, introducing national leadership development pathways that begin at the induction stage and provide differentiated, context-responsive support throughout a teacher's career could foster a more equitable and sustainable leadership pipeline.

Education policy must prioritise structural investments in leadership infrastructure, such as mentoring programmes, peer coaching, and leadership incubation schemes. These mechanisms are not only capacity-building but also retention tools, helping early-career teachers envision a long-term professional future within education.

Implications for researchers

This study also opens up avenues for further academic inquiry. The relational and non-linear nature of leadership identity formation in this context underscores the need for more research into early-career leadership trajectories. Future research might examine how intersecting factors, such as gender, educational background, school size, or geographical location, influence the development of leadership identity in small-state systems like Cyprus. Additionally, exploring how cultural expectations and institutional histories mediate leadership aspirations could contribute to comparative research in Mediterranean or post-colonial education systems.

There is also a clear research gap concerning longitudinal studies that follow aspiring teacher-leaders over time. Tracking how leadership identities evolve in response to systemic reforms, shifting school cultures, or personal life stages could offer valuable insights into when and how educators commit to leadership as a professional pathway. Methodologically, participatory or narrative approaches could capture the deeply personal and evolving nature of these trajectories, complementing the interview-based designs typically used.

Future and further research on the topic

This study invites a more intervention-focused research agenda, as future studies could test the effectiveness of intentional structures, such as mentoring programmes, leadership coaching models, or leadership-focused professional learning communities, in fostering leadership development among early-career teachers. There is also value in exploring the role of digital and hybrid models of leadership development, especially given the increasing importance of flexibility in post-pandemic education systems. Examining how specific leadership experiences, such as leading a school initiative or participating in strategic planning, affect self-perception and confidence over time would offer further nuance to our understanding of early leadership growth.

Ultimately, this study contributes to an expanding literature that views leadership not as a fixed destination, but as a journey, dynamic, relational, and situated. By recognising the complexity and interdependence of the factors influencing leadership development, both in Cyprus and beyond, schools and systems can become more intentional in shaping the leaders of tomorrow.

Summary of findings

Together, these four themes that occurred from the interviews provided a comprehensive view of how primary school teachers begin to aspire or even develop as leaders. School culture, mentorship, leadership confidence, and PD appeared as critical, interconnected features in this process, and supportive school teams and environments, as well as relational guidance, allowed teachers to perceive themselves as leaders, while unbending hierarchies, lack of mentoring, and limited PD opportunities obstructed that growth. These findings offer valuable insights into how schools might more effectively nurture leadership capacity among primary school teachers, not only by creating opportunities, but by fostering cultures that encourage, recognise, and support leadership development from the outset of a teacher's career.

Conclusion

The present study set out to explore the journey of leadership development of Cyprus primary school teachers, drew on semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis, and it became evident that leadership is not simply a function of role acquisition or formal titles. It is a complex, progressing identity shaped by a constellation of interconnected factors that were analysed above, such as school culture, mentorship, confidence, and daily access to PD.

Key findings illustrated that supportive and inclusive school cultures provide fertile ground for nurturing leadership potential, and it was also evident from the participants’ responses that leadership is distributed and contributions are valued, even when teachers begin to recognise themselves as capable leaders. In contrast, hierarchical or exclusionary environments were seen to overpower aspiration and limit leadership enactment, while formal and informal mentorship, emerged as a powerful influence, offering not just guidance, but validation, modelling, and a sense of belonging. Participants mentioned that if they have received consistent, purposeful mentorship, felt more armed and encouraged to take on leadership roles, while those who lacked such support often felt disconnected or ‘far away’ from leadership pathways.

This study shows that leadership confidence developed incrementally, often through scaffolded experiences, opportunities to lead in informal ways and recognition from peers or even current school leaders. However, confidence was delicate and easily destabilised in the absence of support or affirmation. PD opportunities were also pivotal yet unequally distributed, and as some participants (6) benefited from targeted, relevant training that enhanced their leadership readiness, while others (9) were left to navigate their growth autonomously due to lack of access, time, or school-level priorities.

The findings from this research, reinforce the understanding that leadership development is a dynamic, non-linear process, and it is deeply embedded and rooted in interpersonal, cultural, and essential aspects of the school environment. Schools that aspire to cultivate leadership capacity must move beyond tokenistic gestures and commit to strategic and systemic approaches that aim to provide mentorship, create inclusive cultures, and be embedded in leadership development from the outset of a teacher's career path. This need for intentionality echoes calls in the international literature (e.g., Brundrett and Crawford, 2008; Hallinger and Murphy, 1985) for coordinated leadership pipelines that begin early and are responsive to context. These findings contribute to a growing cross-national body of evidence showing that developing school leaders from within the teaching profession is both feasible and necessary, especially in systems facing leadership shortages or succession challenges. These insights echo findings from international contexts (e.g., Leithwood and Riehl, 2005; OECD, 2020), where teacher leadership is increasingly recognised as a driver of school improvement and system-wide equity. The emphasis on early-career development, relational mentorship, and distributed leadership aligns with global frameworks advocating for shared leadership as a cornerstone of effective school reform (Harris and Spillane, 2008). In doing so, this study also contributes to international understandings of leadership formation within small-state, centralised education systems, offering a perspective that is often underrepresented in the literature.

For policymakers and school leaders, on the other hand, the implications are clear, as it will aid teachers to grow into leaders, and leadership must be intentionally seeded and nurtured from early career stages. Democratising access to leadership development is not just a matter of fairness, and it seems to be critical to sustaining a pipeline of empowered, confident, and capable educational leaders. This is consistent with global concerns about leadership succession and retention (Pont et al., 2008), particularly in contexts where leadership development has traditionally been reserved for those in formal positions. These implications are not only relevant for Cyprus but may also inform policy in other similarly structured systems, where formal routes to leadership are narrow and competitive, and informal leadership remains undervalued.

This research showed that future research should consider examining specific interventions, such as meaningful mentoring and coaching programmes, leadership incubators, or distributed leadership models, and how these influence early-career leadership trajectories. Future longitudinal studies may also shed some light on how leadership identities evolve in response to changing contexts, opportunities, and personal ambition. International comparative studies could add depth to this work by examining how national policy structures either enable or inhibit leadership emergence, particularly across culturally diverse yet administratively centralised systems. Comparative or cross-national studies could further explore how sociocultural and policy contexts mediate leadership formation in similar small-state or Mediterranean systems.

Ultimately, this study confirms that leadership is not a destination but a journey; one that begins in the earliest phases of teaching, and one that schools must be intentional in shaping, based on the everyday challenges in the Cyprus primary schools, while also offering transferable insights for international scholars, practitioners, and policymakers who seek to nurture inclusive and sustainable leadership in varied global contexts.