This study aims to identify teachers’ agency profiles and investigate how distributed leadership mediates the empirical link between organisational ambidexterity and teacher agency profiles. This cross-sectional study, which collected data from a sample of 504 teachers working in Ankara province, Türkiye, conducted latent profile analysis with mediation modeling to measure the structural linkages among the study variables. The results showed that the sampled teachers were categorised into three profiles: the engaged pessimist, the reluctant contributor, and the confident pessimist. We observed that most of the teachers were placed in the confident and pessimist profile. The study also provided evidence that distributed leadership significantly indirectly affects teacher agency profiles through ambidexterity. Our findings provide valuable insights that can inform both policy development and practical applications in the field.
AldrupKCarstensenBKlusmannU (2024) The role of teachers’ emotion regulation in teaching effectiveness: A systematic review integrating four lines of research. Educational Psychologist59(2): 89–110.
2.
AmbilichuCAOmotesoKYekiniLS (2023) Strategic leadership and firm performance: The mediating role of ambidexterity in professional services small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises. European Management Review20(3): 493–511. 10.1111/emre.v20.3.
3.
BaskaradaSWatsonJCromartyJ (2016) Leadership and organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Management Development35(6): 778–788.
4.
BellibaşMŞKılınçAÇ (2023) Contextualizing leadership: How does national societal culture shape the practices of school leadership in Türkiye?Bulletin of Educational Studies2(1): 37–49.
5.
Bellibaş MŞ, Çalışkan Ö and Gümüş S (2019) Validity and reliability of teacher agency scale. Trakya Journal of Education 9(1): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.24315/trkefd.406391.
6.
BellibaşMŞPolatcanMKılınçAÇ (2022) Linking instructional leadership to teacher practices: The mediating effect of shared practice and agency in learning effectiveness. Educational Management Administration & Leadership50(5): 812–831.
7.
BerraiesSHamzaKAChtiouiR (2021) Distributed leadership and exploratory and exploitative innovations: Mediating roles of tacit and explicit knowledge sharing and organizational trust. Journal of Knowledge Management25(5): 1287–1318.
8.
BiestaGPriestleyMRobinsonS (2015) The role of beliefs in teacher agency. Teachers and Teaching21(6): 624–640.
9.
BirkinshawJGibsonC (2004) Building ambidexterity into an organization. MIT Sloan management review.
10.
BlauPM (1964) Justice in social exchange. Sociological Inquiry34(2): 193–206. 10.1111/soin.1964.34.issue-2.
11.
BushT (2023) Distributed leadership: A normative theory for policy and practice. Educational Management Administration & Leadership51(4): 771–773.
12.
BushTGloverD (2012) Distributed leadership in action: Leading high-performing leadership teams in English schools. School Leadership & Management32(1): 21–36.
13.
ÇobanÖYalçınMTÖzdemirN (2024) Exploring the moderator role of organisational ambidexterity in the relationship between instructional leadership and teacher instructional practices. Educational Management Administration & Leadership: 17411432241291193. 10.1177/17411432241291193.
14.
CohenJ (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Newyork: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15.
CollieRJShapkaJDPerryNE (2012) School climate and social–emotional learning: Predicting teacher stress, job satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. Journal of Educational Psychology104(4): 1189.
16.
Cooper-SteinKKintzTMinessA (2016) Reflectiveness, adaptivity, and support: How teacher agency promotes student engagement. American Journal of Education123(1): 109–136. 10.1086/688168.
17.
CoplandMA (2003) Leadership of inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for school improvement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis25(4): 375–395.
18.
CrockerDARobeynsI (2010) Capability and agency. In: MorrisCW (ed) Amartya Sen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 60–90.
19.
CropanzanoRMitchellMS (2005) Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management31(6): 874–900. 10.1177/0149206305279602.
20.
Da’asRA (2023) The missing link: Principals’ ambidexterity and teacher creativity. Leadership and Policy in Schools22(1): 119–140.
21.
Da’asRA (2024) Leadership for school mindfulness: The role of school ambidexterity and leaders’ cognitive complexity. Research Papers in Education39(6): 875–893.
22.
DayCGuQ (2010) The new lives of teachers.London:Routledge.
23.
DederingKPietschM (2025) School leader trust and collective teacher innovativeness: On individual and organisational ambidexterity’s mediating role. Educational Review77(2): 351–380. 10.1080/00131911.2023.2195593.
24.
EmirbayerMMischeA (1998) What is agency?American Journal of Sociology103(4): 962–1023.
25.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39–50.
26.
FrostD (2006) The concept of ‘agency’in leadership for learning. Leading & Managing12(2): 19–28.
27.
GibsonCBBirkinshawJ (2004) The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal47(2): 209–226.
28.
GouveiaVVSoaresAKS (2015) Calculadoras de validade de construto (CVC). João Pessoa, PB: BNCS/ Universidade Federal da Paraíba, [Construct Validity Calculators (CVC)] Retrieved from http://akssoares.com/psicometria/calculadora-vmee-cc.
29.
GümüşEBellibaşMŞ (2023) The relationship between the types of professional development activities teachers participate in and their self-efficacy: A multi-country analysis. European Journal of Teacher Education46(1): 67–94.
30.
HairJFBlackWCBabinBJAndersonRE (2019) Multivariate data analysis. 8th ed.Annabel Ainscow.
31.
HarrisA (2005) Reflections on distributed leadership. Management in Education19(2): 10–12. 10.1177/08920206050190020301.
Hawthorne-KocakC (2021) Investigating the relationship between teacher agency, student engagement, and student achievement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rhode Island.
34.
Hendawy Al-MahdyYFHallingerPOmaraEEmamE (2024) Exploring how power distance influences principal instructional leadership effects on teacher agency and classroom instruction in Oman: A moderated-mediation analysis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership52(4): 878–900.
35.
HermanKCHickmon-RosaJReinkeWM (2017) Empirically derived profiles of teacher stress, Burnout, self-efficacy, and coping and associated student outcomes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions20(2): 90–100. 10.1177/1098300717732066.
36.
HilalYYHammadWPolatcanM (2024) Does distributed leadership improve teacher agency? Exploring the mediating effect of teacher reflection. Educational Management Administration & Leadership52(6): 1369–1387. 10.1177/17411432231184602.
37.
HofstedeGHofstedeGJMinkovM (2010) Cultures and organizations software of the mind. London: McGraw Hill.
38.
HomansGC (1958) Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology63(6): 597–606. 10.1086/222355.
39.
HulpiaHDevosGRosseelY (2009) Development and validation of scores on the distributed leadership inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement69(6): 1013–1034. 10.1177/0013164409344490.
40.
In de WalJJden BrokPJHooijerJGMartens Lvan den Beemt A (2014) Teachers’ engagement in professional learning: Exploring motivational profiles. Learning and Individual Differences36: 27–36.
41.
JonesSHarveyMLefoeG RylandK (2014) Synthesising theory and practice: Distributed leadership in higher education. Educational Management Administration & Leadership42(5): 603–619.
42.
KauppilaOPTempelaarMP (2016) The social-cognitive underpinnings of employees’ ambidextrous behaviour and the supportive role of group managers’ leadership. Journal of Management Studies53(6): 1019–1044.
43.
KılınçAÇÖzdemirNPolatcanMSavaşGDolapcıE (2025) Linking transformational leadership to teacher commitment and alienation: Do motivational climate profiles moderate?. Educational Management Administration & Leadership53(3): 536–560. 10.1177/17411432231184602.
44.
KlassenRMChiuMM (2010) Effects on teachers’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction: Teacher gender, years of experience, and job stress. Journal of Educational Psychology102(3): 741.
45.
KoryakOLockettAHaytonJ Nicolaou NMole K (2018) Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation. Research Policy47(2): 413–427.
46.
KraftMAPapayJP (2014) Can professional environments in schools promote teacher development? Explaining heterogeneity in returns to teaching experience. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis36(4): 476–500.
47.
LashwayL (2003) Distributed leadership. Research Roundup19(4): 1–6.
48.
LauJVähäsantanenKCollinK (2022) Teachers’ professional agency in a centralisation-decentralisation system and a hierarchical cultural context: The case of Hong Kong. Pedagogy Culture & Society32(3): 699–719.
49.
LelieurREspejoJMRVanhoofJ (2024) Variation in teachers’ academic optimism: Examining the impact of classroom composition and school academic optimism. International Journal of Educational Research125: 102350.
50.
LiuLLiuPYangHYaoHThien M (2024) The relationship between distributed leadership and teacher well-being: The mediating roles of organisational trust. Educational Management Administration & Leadership52(4): 837–853.
51.
LiuSHallingerPFengD (2016) Supporting the professional learning of teachers in China does principal leadership make a difference. Teaching and Teacher Education59: 79–91.
52.
LubkeGNealeMC (2006) Distinguishing between latent classes and continuous factors: Resolution by maximum likelihood?Multivariate Behavioral Research41(4): 499–532. 10.1207/s15327906mbr4104_4.
53.
LugerJRaischSSchimmerM (2018) Dynamic balancing of exploration and exploitation: The contingent benefits of ambidexterity. Organization Science29(3): 449–470.
MacBeathJ (2005) Leadership as distributed: A matter of practice. School Leadership and Management25(4): 349–366.
56.
MeirkulovaAGelişliY (2022) The social status of the teaching profession: Teachers’ views in Turkey and Kazakhstan. Hacettepe University Journal of Education37(2): 424–439.
57.
NemanichLAVeraD (2009) Transformational leadership and ambidexterity in the context of an acquisition. The Leadership Quarterly20(1): 19–33.
58.
Nylund-GibsonKGrimmRQuirkMFurlongM (2014) A latent transition mixture model using the three-step specification. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal21(3): 439–454. 10.1080/10705511.2014.915375.
59.
O’ReillyCATushmanML (2004) The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review82(4): 74–83.
60.
O'ReillyCATushmanML (2013) Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Perspectives27(4): 324–338. 10.5465/amp.2013.0025.
61.
OsbornRNHuntJGJauchLR (2002) Toward a contextual theory of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly13(6): 797–837.
62.
Özdemir M (2012) Turkish adaptation of distributed leadership inventory: The validity and reliability studies. Educational Administration in Theory and Practice 4(4): 575–598.
63.
ÖzdemirMDemircioğluE (2015) Distributed leadership and contract relations: Evidence from turkish high schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership43(6): 918–938.
64.
ÖzdemirMKaymakMNÇetinOU (2023) Unlocking teacher potential: The integrated influence of empowering leadership and authentic leadership on teacher self-efficacy and agency in Turkey. Educational Management Administration & Leadership53(5): 1083–1104. 10.1177/17411432231217136.
65.
ÖzdemirNÇobanÖBuyukgozeHGümüşSPietschM (2024) Leading knowledge exploration and exploitation in schools: The moderating role of teachers’ open innovation mindset. Educational Administration Quarterly60(5): 668–717. 10.1177/0013161X241281391.
66.
PattonMQ (2002) Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. 3rd ed.London: Sage.
67.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBLeeJY PodsakoffNP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology88(5): 79.
68.
PolatcanM (2024) An exploration of the relationship between distributed leadership, teacher agency, and professional learning in Turkey. Professional Development in Education50(4): 789–803.
69.
PolatcanMArslanPBalciA (2023) The mediating effect of teacher self-efficacy regarding the relationship between transformational school leadership and teacher agency. Educational Studies49(5): 823–841.
70.
PolatcanMÖzkanPBellibaşMŞ (2024) Cultivating teacher innovativeness through transformational leadership and teacher agency in schools: The moderating role of teacher trust. Journal of Professional Capital and Community9(3): 227–242. 10.1108/JPCC-01-2024-0008.
71.
PriestleyMEdwardsRPriestleyAMillerK (2012) Teacher agency in curriculum making: Agents of change and spaces for manoeuvre. Curriculum Inquiry42(2): 191–214. 10.1111/j.1467-873X.2012.00588.x.
RackelmannTŞMüftüoğluACTurhanB (2023) Taking the lid off in-service teacher education in Turkey: Voices from stakeholders. International Journal of Research in Teacher Education14(1): 38–53.
74.
Rao-NicholsonRKhanZAkhtarPMerchantH (2016) The impact of leadership on organizational ambidexterity and employee psychological safety in the global acquisitions of emerging market multinationals. The International Journal of Human Resource Management27(20): 2461–2487. 10.1080/09585192.2016.1204557.
75.
RaykovT (1997) Scale reliability, cronbach's coefficient alpha, and violations of essential tau-equivalence with fixed congeneric components. Multivariate Behavioral Research32(4): 329–353.
SarmentoMSimõesCLagesLF (2024) From organizational ambidexterity to organizational performance: The mediating role of value co-creation. Industrial Marketing Management118: 175–188. 10.1016/j.indmarman.2024.02.010.
78.
ShalTGhamrawiNAbu-TinehA Al-ShaboulYMSellamiA (2024) Teacher leadership and virtual communities: Unpacking teacher agency and distributed leadership. Education and Information Technologies29(12): 15025–15042. 10.1007/s10639-023-12446-5.
79.
SpillaneJP (2006) Distributed leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
80.
SpillaneJPHalversonRDiamondJB (2004) Towards a theory of leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies36(1): 3–34.
81.
ThorpeRGoldJLawlerJ (2011) Locating distributed leadership. International Journal of Management Reviews13(3): 239–250.
82.
TianMVirtanenT (2021) Shanghai teachers’ perceptions of distributed leadership: Resources and agency. ECNU Review of Education4(4): 808–829.
83.
TushmanMLO'ReillyCA (1996) Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review38(4): 8–29. 10.2307/41165852.
84.
UotilaJMaulaMKeilTZahraSA (2009) Exploration, exploitation, and financial performance: Analysis of S&P 500 corporations. Strategic Management Journal30(2): 221–231. 10.1002/smj.738.
85.
YaoHMaL (2024) Improving teacher career satisfaction through distributed leadership in China: The parallel mediation of teacher empowerment and organizational commitment. International Journal of Educational Development104. 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2023.102960.
86.
Yli-PietiläRSoiniTPietarinenJPyhältöK (2024) Profiles of teacher’s professional agency in the classroom across time. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research68(5): 954–968. 10.1080/00313831.2023.2196536.
