Worry at the top: Understanding and managing worry in elementary school leadership

Abstract

Worry is a common feature of leadership roles, yet it has received limited attention in research on school principals. This study explores how elementary school principals understand and manage worry in their professional lives. Using a grounded theory approach, in-depth interviews were conducted with 19 Israeli principals. The findings present a conceptual model that frames worry as a multifaceted emotional experience and distinguishes between two central types: worry as responsibility and worry as achievement. Worry as responsibility reflects principals’ concerns for student safety, emotional well-being, and the overall functioning of the school. Worry as achievement captures pressure to meet expectations and the fear of professional failure. The study also identifies three coping strategies through which principals manage worry: active problem-solving, seeking support and building trust, and creating personal moments of calm. The study contributes theoretically by introducing an appraisal-based framework that distinguishes between moral appraisal, which refers to internal responsibility, and a performance-based appraisal, tied to external expectations and accountability pressures. It positions worry as a meaningful cognitive and emotional process rather than merely a form of stress and highlights its role in shaping principals’ interpretation of professional demands.

Keywords

School leadership elementary school principals worry at work emotional coping educational management

Introduction

The emotional lives of school administrators have received growing scholarly attention, reflecting the recognition that leadership in schools is not only managerial or instructional, but deeply affective and personal (Arar, 2017; Dor-Haim, 2023). Recent research has explored a wide range of negative emotions among school principals, including stress (Doyle Fosco et al., 2025), frustration (Dor-Haim, 2025a), fear (Thambi, 2020), and anxiety (Reid, 2022). Despite this growing body of literature, a sense of worry has been largely overlooked in studies on school principals. Worry is characterized by persistent, negatively oriented thoughts about potential future threats, often associated with uncertainty, responsibility, and a desire to prevent harm (Armitage, 2025; Borkovec et al., 1998). It operates as an anticipatory cognitive process, through which individuals mentally simulate possible risks, consider responses, and attempt to maintain a sense of control in uncertain situations (Parmentier et al., 2024).

This anticipatory nature of worry is particularly relevant in the context of school leadership. Principals operate in environments characterized by constant change, high accountability, moral responsibility, and unpredictable demands (Wells and Klocko, 2018). Their role requires ongoing anticipation of potential problems related to student safety, staff well-being, parental expectations, and institutional performance (Dor-Haim, 2024; Hallinger, 2018). In such contexts, worry may serve not only as an emotional reaction but also as a cognitive planning mechanism that supports future-oriented decision-making and ethical responsibility. School principals must manage a wide range of challenges, including instructional leadership, staff supervision, student behavior, and parent relations (Tamadoni et al., 2024).

These demands often generate emotional strain, commonly expressed through stress, anxiety, and frustration (Reid, 2022; Walker, 2020). While fear and anxiety have received increasing scholarly attention in the context of school leadership (Reid, 2022; Thambi, 2020), worry has typically been subsumed under these broader constructs and examined as a secondary manifestation of stress or anxiety. As a result, worry has rarely been conceptualized as a distinct phenomenon with its own internal structure and functions. In particular, limited attention has been given to the possibility that worry may encompass different forms, reflect varied appraisal processes, and operate as a meaningful anticipatory mechanism. Consequently, the ways in which principals experience and interpret worry as a differentiated, future-oriented, and meaning-making process remain underexplored.

This study aims to address this gap by exploring how elementary school principals interpret their experiences of worry and the strategies they use to cope with it. Two research questions guide the inquiry: (1) What are the perceived sources of worry among elementary school principals? (2) What coping strategies do principals employ to manage worry in their professional roles? To answer these questions, the study conceptualizes worry as a distinct anticipatory cognitive-emotional construct with its own typology and appraisal processes. Specifically, the study distinguishes between two forms of worry: worry as responsibility, which is grounded in principals’ moral concern for students and staff, and worry as achievement, which is linked to performance expectations and accountability pressures. It thus offers a novel perspective on leadership feelings. It highlights how worry reflects principals’ moral responsibility, future-oriented planning, and efforts to navigate uncertainty in high-stakes educational environments.

Conceptualizing worry: Definitions and distinctions

Worry is a pervasive psychological phenomenon that arises in response to perceived threats to one's goals, values, or significant relationships. It is widely regarded as the cognitive dimension of anxiety, characterized by repetitive and negatively oriented thoughts about uncertain future events (Paulsen, 2025). Psychological research has emphasized that worry serves as a function of emotional regulation. It enables individuals to avoid the emotional discomfort triggered by recognizing possible threats and offers a way to mentally prepare for these threats (Armitage, 2025; Borkovec et al., 1998). Other scholars consider worry as a practical, problem-solving mechanism that maintains attention to potential dangers and supports anticipatory planning (Ojala et al., 2021; Parmentier et al., 2024). From this perspective, worry is not merely a sign of distress but a cognitive strategy for navigating uncertainty and preparing for action. In this sense, it occupies a meaningful space between emotional arousal and goal-directed coping, functioning as a regulatory process that allows individuals to manage both affective and environmental demands (Borkovec et al., 1998).

In distinguishing worry from related psychological constructs, it is essential to clarify how it differs from anxiety, fear, and stress. Although worry and anxiety are closely connected, they are conceptually distinct. Anxiety is generally understood as a negative emotional state triggered by uncertain or ambiguous threats (Kurth, 2018; Vazard, 2024; Yip et al., 2020). Worry, by contrast, is a cognitive process that involves mentally rehearsing potential future events, evaluating possible outcomes, and considering appropriate responses (Borkovec et al., 1998). In this sense, anxiety signals the presence of threat, while worry provides a mental mechanism for grappling with it, serving as an intermediary between threat detection and action planning (Armitage, 2025).

Fear, on the other hand, is a more immediate and reactive emotion that arises in response to specific, concrete threats. Unlike the anticipatory nature of worry or the diffuse alertness of anxiety, fear is rooted in the present moment and tied to direct perception of danger. It is typically accompanied by strong physiological arousal and behavioral impulses aimed at immediate self-protection (Adolphs, 2013; Oplatka and Oren, 2020). Stress, nevertheless, is best understood as a broader transactional process, wherein individuals perceive that environmental demands exceed their coping resources (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984). Together, these constructs illustrate a spectrum of human response to perceived threat—ranging from cognitive anticipation (worry) to emotional alertness (anxiety), to immediate survival reaction (fear).

School principals’ challenges and responsibilities

Understanding the nature of worry requires examining the specific professional context in which it emerges. In the case of school principals, their daily responsibilities and systemic challenges (Dor-Haim and Nir, 2025) provide fertile ground for the development of persistent worry and related emotional strain. School principals across diverse educational systems face increasingly complex challenges shaped by both local demands and global educational trends (Tamadoni et al., 2024). Their responsibilities span leadership, organizational management, and student outcomes (Hallinger, 2018). Common challenges include insufficient professional development, low academic achievement, and difficult staff dynamics (Dor-Haim, 2025b; Tamadoni et al., 2024). Academic improvement remains a central concern, with principals addressing student disengagement and behavioral issues. In the United States, for example, accountability pressures have intensified due to federal mandates such as the No Child Left Behind Act (Padhi, 2010).

Principals also contend with significant financial constraints, including teacher shortages, limited instructional materials, and outdated technology (Chan et al., 2019). Rising accountability demands (Camphuijsen, 2021), declining public respect, and ideological tensions further complicate the role, especially in contexts where gender norms and resistance to inclusive leadership persist (Tintoré et al., 2020; Tamadoni et al., 2024). In addition to instructional leadership, principals are expected to ensure school safety, manage public relations, and oversee personnel and technological development. These challenges vary by context: in the U.S., safety is a dominant concern, while in China, personnel management is a daily operational priority (Chan et al., 2019). Centralized systems like those in Chile and Saudi Arabia face issues such as bureaucracy and limited autonomy, whereas decentralized systems like Sweden and Canada are challenged by frequent policy shifts and institutional instability (Raihani, 2008).

Fear and anxiety among school principals

Building on the complex demands placed on school principals, recent research has increasingly highlighted the emotional strain associated with their leadership roles (Dor-Haim, 2025a; Doyle Fosco et al., 2025; Tamadoni et al., 2024). While the concept of worry remains largely underexplored in studies on educational leadership, closely related emotional experiences, such as fear, anxiety, and stress, have received limited yet meaningful scholarly attention (Oplatka and Oren, 2020; Reid, 2022; Thambi, 2020). These experiences often intersect with worry and offer important insight into their potential impact (Armitage, 2025). Work-related stress and anxiety are widespread among principals, particularly when institutional demands are high and resources are insufficient, forcing them to assume additional responsibilities to offset financial and operational gaps (Walker, 2020; Wells and Klocko, 2018).

Fear is frequently embedded in principals’ emotional landscape, often emerging in connection with vulnerability, uncertainty, and the perceived risks inherent in educational leadership (Oplatka and Oren, 2020; Thambi, 2020). The demanding and unpredictable nature of the principalship further heightens anxiety, with principals reporting persistent concerns about angry parents, legal liability for staff actions, and the intense scrutiny they face from the public (Dor-Haim, 2025a; Gronn, 2009; Reid, 2022). These challenges, combined with mounting accountability pressures, contribute significantly to burnout, stress, and frustration (Dor-Haim, 2024; Sibisanu et al., 2024).

Research has consistently shown that principals experience fear and anxiety in response to multiple stressors, including fear of failure, job insecurity, interpersonal conflict, and systemic change (McKillop and Moorosi, 2017; Reid, 2022; Thambi, 2020). This emotional toll is intensified by the principal's position as the ultimate figure of accountability within the school, often contributing to feelings of isolation and loneliness (Dor-Haim, 2022). Principals also report fear related to performance expectations, public image, and navigating increasingly complex policy environments (Schmidt, 2009). Fear of change, judgment, and perceived inadequacy may shape decision-making, at times leading to avoidance or hesitancy to act (Pinto, 2015). These persistent fears can foster a climate of chronic vulnerability (Thambi, 2020). Despite their prevalence, such emotional struggles are rarely acknowledged, as cultural and institutional norms often discourage school leaders from expressing fear or anxiety openly (Oplatka and Oren, 2020; Taxer and Frenzel, 2015).

While fear and anxiety are commonly understood as reactions to immediate or ongoing stressors (Oplatka and Oren, 2020; Vazard, 2024), they do not fully capture the anticipatory meaning-making processes through which principals prepare for future challenges. Worry, by contrast, functions as a forward-looking, verbal-cognitive process that involves anticipating potential threats and negotiating moral responsibility over time (Armitage, 2025; Paulsen, 2025). Despite its relevance to leadership judgment and decision-making under uncertainty, this anticipatory dimension of worry remains undertheorized in educational leadership research.

Methodology

This study employs a grounded theory approach to construct a conceptual framework for understanding the experience of worry among elementary school principals (Charmaz, 2014; Strauss and Corbin, 1990). Grounded theory enables an in-depth exploration of how principals interpret the conditions that give rise to professional worry. Through systematic analysis of recurring patterns in participants’ narratives, this approach reveals the institutional, emotional, and relational complexities (Creswell and Poth, 2018) that shape the phenomenon of worry within educational leadership.

Existing theoretical models of worry, typically developed outside of educational settings, do not adequately capture the unique challenges faced by school principals. Principals operate in emotionally charged environments defined by continual change, heightened accountability, and limited resources and must navigate competing demands (Tamadoni et al., 2024). These overlapping responsibilities often generate emotional strain about their capacity to safeguard students and staff, sustain educational quality, and adapt to shifting policy expectations (Reid, 2022; Walker, 2020). This study addresses these dynamics by constructing a theoretical framework that reflects the organizational and interpersonal dimensions of worry in school leadership.

Participant selection

The sample included 19 elementary school principals (16 women and 3 men), reflecting the feminization of elementary school leadership in Israel (Central Bureau of Statistics, 2026). Participants ranged in age from 36 to 66 years (M = 49.3), with tenure as principals ranging from 1 to 26 years (M = 6.8). Ten principals worked in urban settings, located in medium-sized cities with populations between 70,000 and 250,000, while nine served in rural areas. The sample also reflects the diversity of the Israeli educational system, which is shaped by social, national, and political divisions. Fourteen principals were from the state secular system, one from the state religious system, and four from the Arab state education system.

Participants were selected using a combination of criterion-based sampling and snowball sampling techniques (Patton, 2014). Principals were included based on the following criteria: (a) participants who could offer deep insight into the experience of worry in their work at school, (b) serving in public elementary schools, and (c) being recognized by colleagues or teachers as individuals likely to articulate emotional and reflective perspectives, particularly in relation to professional concern and worry. As interviews progressed and initial categories began to form, the study adopted theoretical sampling to strengthen and refine its emerging conceptual framework (Charmaz, 2014; Creswell and Poth, 2018). This involved deliberately selecting principals whose professional contexts or leadership environments were likely to expand understanding of particular themes. At the end of each interview, participants were invited to suggest other principals who might meet the study criteria (Marshall et al., 2022). Data collection concluded when theoretical saturation was reached, meaning that no substantially new themes or insights emerged from further interviews (Charmaz, 2014).

Because expressing negative emotions requires mutual trust, establishing rapport with school principals was essential. Snowball sampling helped build initial trust by relying on referrals from known and respected colleagues (Josselson, 2013; Marshall et al., 2022). To encourage openness and elicit genuine responses during the interview, the interviewer practiced active listening and empathy, and prompted reflection to reduce socially desirable answers (Bush, 2012; Creswell and Poth, 2018). Participants were also assured of confidentiality and reminded that there were no right or wrong answers (Josselson, 2013).

Data collection and analysis

Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were conducted, each lasting about 90 min (see Appendix). A structured interview guide ensured consistency across sessions (Marshall et al., 2022; Patton, 2014). The interviews explored how elementary school principals experience and interpret worry in their professional roles and the strategies they use to cope with it. Example questions included: “Can you describe a situation where you felt a sense of worry related to your role as a principal?”; “What kind of situations tend to cause you worry or concern in your work?”; “What actions or strategies did you use to deal with that worry?” All interviews were audio-recorded with participants’ consent, and identifying details were removed to ensure anonymity. To minimize social desirability bias (Patton, 2014), interviews began with open-ended, neutral questions, and the interviewer maintained an impartial and non-judgmental stance throughout.

The data were analyzed using a systematic inductive process grounded in constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz, 2014). Coding was conducted manually by the author, who carried out all stages of the analysis. In the initial stage of open coding, recurring concepts were identified directly from participants’ language. Illustrative expressions such as “I worry about student safety every day” or “It keeps me up at night when I feel the school is not functioning well” were coded to form early categories. During axial coding, these codes were re-examined to identify conceptual links and organize them into coherent thematic groups (Marshall et al., 2022). For example, phrases such as “always trying to meet expectations” and “afraid to disappoint” were clustered under the category “Concern about meeting expectations,” while statements like “I constantly think about the welfare of the students” were grouped under “Concern for students’ emotional well-being.” This stage allowed for the development of more abstract categories by connecting concrete statements across interviews.

In selective coding, the analysis focused on identifying a central theme that integrated the emerging categories. The overarching insight that shaped the framework was that worry functions as a contextualized emotional response to perceived professional responsibilities and performance expectations. These emergent themes were then compared with existing literature to evaluate conceptual alignment and novelty (Creswell and Poth, 2018). For instance, the emphasis on coping strategies, such as seeking support or creating moments of calm echoes broader findings in leadership literature on resilience.

To strengthen the trustworthiness of the study, the researcher kept reflective memos throughout data analysis, documenting interpretations of principals’ experiences of worry and refining emerging categories (Marshall et al., 2022). Peer debriefing with academic colleagues was used to review coding decisions and thematic interpretations, supporting analytic rigor and consideration of alternative explanations (Charmaz, 2014). The researcher adopted a reflexive stance, acknowledging personal assumptions about leadership emotions while maintaining analytical distance as an organizational and educational psychologist with no direct professional involvement in the participants’ school contexts. Care was taken to ensure that interpretations of worry were grounded in principals’ accounts rather than in prior theoretical assumptions. Finally, all worry-related categories were systematically revisited in the raw interview data to enhance credibility and confirmability (Yin, 2018).

Findings

The findings reveal three central themes that capture how elementary school principals experience and interpret worry in their professional lives. The first theme, worry as responsibility, reflects internally driven concerns grounded in moral obligation and care for students and the school community. It encompasses three categories: worry about student safety, concern for students’ emotional well-being, and worry about the school's overall functioning. The second theme, worry as achievement, reflects externally driven concerns related to expectations, evaluation, and professional performance. It encompasses two categories: concern about meeting expectations and being worried about professional failure. Although these forms of worry are conceptually distinct, in practice they often overlap, as the same situations may evoke both a sense of responsibility and pressure to meet external standards. The third theme, coping strategies, describes how principals manage their worry through three main approaches: active problem-solving, seeking support and building trust, and creating personal moments of calm. Table 1 summarizes the central themes and their corresponding categories.

Table 1.

Analytic structure of principals’ worry: themes, codes, and triggering conditions.

Theme	Category	Representative codes (interpretive meaning)	Illustrative quote	Typical triggering conditions (situational contexts)
Worry as Responsibility	Worry About Student Safety	Anticipatory fear of physical harm; moral responsibility for protection; heightened vigilance	“Worry exists on several levels. It's about the safety and protection of the children. That alone is a major concern.”	School trips; emergency situations; unsafe infrastructure; violent student behavior
	Concern for Students’ Emotional Well-Being	Emotional distress; fear of unaddressed distress; responsibility for psychological safety	“What worries me is the emotional well-being of my students. The harm they face online and the feeling of being left out socially are very real.”	Cyberbullying incidents; social exclusion; disclosure of emotional distress
	Worry About Overall School Functioning	Perceived ultimate accountability; fear of systemic failure; burden of sole responsibility	“Worry is always there … it's a deep kind of worry, the feeling that everything depends on you.”	building readiness delays; administrative crises; public criticism
Worry as Achievement	Concern About Meeting Expectations	Self-doubt about performance; fear of external judgment; uncertainty about professional standards	“It's constant worry, wondering if I’m doing the right thing. Is this what the Ministry wants?”	Ministry demands; supervisory monitoring; performance evaluations
Worry as Achievement	Being worried about professional failure	Fear of not coping; threat to professional identity; anxiety about long-term consequences	“If the relationships between teachers and students are not strong enough… I worry.”	Failure to meet implementation targets; risk of funding loss; weak student outcomes
Coping Strategies	Active Problem-Solving	Cognitive clarification of worry; restoration of control; proactive risk management	“I ask myself why am I worried and what's triggering it? […] I dismantle the worry piece by piece.”	Safety concerns; situations requiring immediate decision-making
	Seeking Support and Building Trust	Sharing emotional burden; reliance on trusted relationships; collective containment of worry	“My parents are huge support… My staff also stand by my side and fight alongside me.”	Emotional overload; leadership dilemmas; moments of isolation or self-doubt
	Creating Personal Moments of Calm	Emotional regulation; psychological distancing; self-soothing	Music and walking are also things that help me decompress. Those are my main ways of coping when I feel worried	Accumulated stress; end-of-day exhaustion; prolonged uncertainty

Note: Representative codes reflect principals’ subjective interpretations and appraisals of worry. Typical triggering conditions refer to external situations in which worry was reported to arise.

Theme 1: Worry as responsibility

The principals in the study described their worry as grounded in a strong sense of personal responsibility for others. This included ongoing concerns about student safety, emotional well-being, and the smooth functioning of the school at both pedagogical and administrative levels.

Worry about student safety

About two-thirds of the principals described worry over students’ physical safety as a central part of their role. This concern intensified during school trips, emergencies, or when safety hazards arose on school grounds. The sense of ultimate responsibility for preventing harm, even under uncontrollable conditions, deeply contributed to their persistent worry. This sentiment is illustrated by the following two principals:

When children go on trips, I worry until they return safely. One year, we had a trip during a missile attack, it was extremely stressful. You worry that each child arrives and returns safely. Even a crying child is concerned, especially how they’ll describe it to parents. I was also alert about staff safety. The schoolyards worried me too, like a loose hoop or unsecured gate. It was frightening. (Woman, 8 years of experience)

Worry exists on several levels. It's about the safety and protection of the children. That alone is a major concern. As a principal, you carry responsibility for the entire school environment. If there's a loose pole and a child get hurt, it's still on you. So, there's constant concern about whether the environment is truly safe. That's the kind of worry you carry every day. (Woman, 12 years of experience)

While many principals emphasized their responsibility for students’ physical safety during trips and daily school life, others identified school violence as a major source of worry. The following principal illustrates this concern:

I have a very challenging student. I’m dealing with a mother whose child was hurt by him, and she's demanding answers I simply don’t have. I worry about the children who feel unsafe in school. The violence, the cursing, it's all coming from that one child. I worry that something serious could happen. The children's safety is in my hands, and it's my responsibility to protect them. (Woman, 5 years of experience)

Concern for students’ emotional well-being

Around 30% of school principals expressed that their worry stems from a deep concern for students’ emotional and psychological well-being. They described feeling personally responsible for identifying signs of distress and responding to issues such as social exclusion or emotional hardship. This sentiment is aptly illustrated by two principals:

What worries me is the emotional well-being of my students. The harm they face online and the feeling of being left out socially are very real. Dealing with that kind of worry takes resources, and when we do not have enough, it just keeps repeating itself. (Woman, 12 years of experience)

The worry comes when you know a child is really hurting, and you cannot help them right away. Some come from broken families, some express suicidal thoughts. I remember one student with serious mental health struggles tried to jump from a high place; I physically stopped him. That moment stayed with me and kept me up at night. (Woman, 7 years of experience)

Some principals described how their concern deepened in complex situations involving both student distress and parental pressure, especially when external support was lacking. The following principal illustrates this experience:

One case that really worried me involved a child who wanted to skip a grade. I could see how much distress he was in. He didn’t want to come to school, and his father was clearly overwhelmed and didn’t know how to help him. In the end, I agreed to move him up, even though I wasn’t sure it was the right move. I kept worrying whether I had really done what was best for him. (Woman, 7 years of experience)

Worry about overall school functioning

More than half of the principals in the study described their worry as arising from the broad responsibility they hold for the school. They emphasized the constant pressure to manage multiple domains simultaneously, including pedagogy, administration, and staff relations, while ensuring that all parts operate smoothly. This sense of burden is illustrated by the following principals:

When something goes wrong at school, the principal is held accountable. I’m responsible for over four hundred students, for the staff, for pedagogy, for academic outcomes, and for ensuring everyone feels safe and supported. It's a massive responsibility. […] No matter what happens, even when I’m not physically present, it's still on me: finances, security, pedagogy, staff morale, and students’ sense of belonging. (Woman, 5 years of experience)

Some principals emphasized the ongoing pressure of being ultimately responsible for the school's functioning, even when challenges are beyond their control. The two following principals illustrate this sentiment:

Worry is always there. For example, before the school year started, I was terrified the building wouldn’t be ready on time. It's a deep kind of worry, the feeling that everything depends on you. You stand in front of students, parents, and staff, and there's no proper place to teach. This year we also had a power outage—heavy rain, no heating, no air conditioners. There was nothing more I could do, but the worry just stayed with me. (Woman, first year in position)

I worry because it's all on me. The criticism is directed at me. I’m the one being blamed. I’m under constant scrutiny. Even when someone sits next to me and talks things through, I still feel like the guilty one. It's part of what it means to carry responsibility. (Woman, 8 years of experience)

Theme 2: Worry as achievement

Over half of the principals described worry as a strong drive to prove their competence. For some, it was linked to the pressure to meet high stakeholder expectations, while others associated it with a persistent fear of failure, in student outcomes, leadership performance, or relationships.

Concern about meeting expectations

About one-third of the principals linked their worry to constant pressure from external stakeholders. They described the need to meet targets, deliver results, and adapt to shifting demands, which fostered a sense of vulnerability and ongoing worry, as illustrated by the following principals:

The worry comes from wondering, “What's happening elsewhere? How do I measure up?” You feel pressure to prove yourself, especially as a first-year principal. You want your work to be recognized. […] It is a sense of being constantly observed and evaluated. You worry how others see you and how closely they’re scrutinizing your performance. (Woman, 4 years of experience)

It's constant worry, wondering if I’m doing the right thing. Is this what the Ministry wants? Am I working the right way or making mistakes? Am I on the right path? I walk around with these questions all the time. The concern stems from this ongoing doubt. What new demands will they bring? (Woman, 5 years of experience)

While many principals mentioned pressure from the Ministry of Education, some highlighted fear of their supervisors’ reactions as a key source of worry. The following principal illustrates how strained supervisory relations can intensify this vulnerability:

I worry most about the supervisor getting angry with me. Once, I left my phone behind. When I returned, I saw ten missed calls from the supervisor. I called back, and she screamed at me how I dared not to be available. […] Supervisors can make your life very difficult. When they are angry, you can find yourself in a very bad place. (Woman, 8 years of experience)

Being worried about professional failure

Roughly one-third of the principals described worry rooted in fear of not meeting their own professional standards and aspirations. Anchored in a strong sense of purpose and dedication to meaningful leadership, this self-imposed pressure emerged as a central source of worry, as illustrated by the following principals:

I worry about facing situations I won’t be able to manage. Take last week, for example. We had to achieve 72% implementation in the Pedagogical Management Framework. If we don’t meet that target, we risk losing funding for next year. There's always something to worry about […] I don’t want to be seen as someone who failed, as a principal who can’t cope. I’m constantly worried that things won’t work out. (Woman, first year in office)

What worries me most is the level of success, both in achievements and in relationships. […] If student results do not meet expectations, I worry. If the relationships between teachers and students are not strong enough to support meaningful learning experiences, I worry. When the team lacks collaboration or there is friction among staff, that too is concerning. (Man, 26 years of experience)

Theme 3: Coping strategies

Principals described various ways of managing the worry tied to their role. A key approach was active problem-solving, which is breaking down concerns and addressing them step by step. Many also relied on support systems, including trusted colleagues and family. Others highlighted the value of creating personal moments of calm through activities like walking, music, or time with friends, which offered much-needed emotional relief.

Active problem-solving

About 40% of the principals identified active problem-solving as their main strategy for coping with worry. They emphasized breaking problems into manageable parts, analyzing causes, and finding practical solutions to regain control and ease emotional strain. This approach was seen as essential for maintaining effectiveness and well-being, as illustrated by the following two principals:

To cope with worry, the first step is to clarify what it is. Worrying can’t remain vague or amorphous; it needs a clear definition. You have to give it a name, identify its beginning and end. In other words, form it into a clear sentence that makes sense to you. The process is about distilling the source of that worry. (Woman, 7 years of experience)

I ask myself why am I worried and what's triggering it? If it's about safety outside, I will bring the safety officer, and we will check the grounds. If it's inside the classrooms, we tighten procedures to minimize risks. I dismantle the worry piece by piece so it's manageable. I don’t let worry paralyze me, I stay proactive. (Woman, first year in office)

Seeking support and building trust

About half of the principals described seeking support and building trust as a central way of coping with worry. They highlighted the value of trusted colleagues, staff members, and personal networks with whom they could share concerns and feel understood. As one principal explained, “We support each other, give advice, and help one another through difficult situations” (female principal, 5 years of experience). This relational approach is illustrated in the accounts of the following two principals:

I’ve learned that sharing and collaboration really help. You need to build a system based on trust. Trusting others and allowing yourself to rely on them. That's something I still need to work on. It's about my ability to let go. Ultimately, it's about creating structures that distribute worry and responsibility across more people. (Woman, 3 years of experience)

I lean on the people around me. I have friends I can be completely open with. One sees me as I am, with all my emotions exposed, while another gives me strength and encouragement. My parents are huge support; they tell me not to worry, that they’re with me no matter what, and that if needed, they’ll step in for me. My staff also stand by my side and fight alongside me when challenges come up. (Man, 7 years of experience)

Creating personal moments of calm

About half of the principals described creating personal moments of calm as an important way to manage worry. They mentioned activities outside of work as helpful sources of relief, such as spending time with friends or family, walking, listening to music, or enjoying food. This approach is reflected in the following examples of principals who were asked to tell how they cope with worry:

I look for sources of strength. Spending time with good friends, going out for a drink, buying something small like a shirt, or just enjoying a cup of coffee to clear my head. Being around people who appreciate me really helps. Also, studying helps me cope with concern. It gives me energy and perspective. (Woman, 5 years of experience)

I’ll admit, food helps me cope. When I feel overwhelmed, I tend to turn to food. I’m not into sweets, but I’ll order something indulgent to enjoy at school. It makes me feel better. […] Music and walking are also things that help me decompress. Those are my main ways of coping when I feel worried. (Woman, 10 years of experience)

Discussion

This study explored how elementary school principals experience worry in their professional roles and the strategies they use to manage it. The findings present a conceptual model that organizes worry into three interconnected dimensions: its sources, the way it is interpreted, and the coping responses it generates (see Figure 1). Taken together, the findings suggest that worry is not a marginal or incidental emotion in school leadership. Rather, it is a central component of principals’ daily sensemaking and decision-making, shaped by organizational conditions and moral commitments. An analysis of the principals’ accounts revealed several key insights into how they understand and respond to worry in their daily work.

Figure 1.

A conceptual model of worry in educational leadership.

The first major finding relates to the sources of worry, which clustered around two central themes: worry as responsibility and worry as achievement. Worry as responsibility captures principals’ internalized moral and professional duty, grounded in their values and identity as caretakers of the school community. These findings extend prior research documenting principals’ burdens related to safety, emotional labor, and community expectations (Reid, 2022; Spillane and Lee, 2014). They further show that such responsibilities are experienced not merely as managerial tasks but as sustained emotional commitments. This form of worry is intensified by the gap between principals’ extensive responsibilities and their limited authority to enact systemic change (Elomaa et al., 2023; Grinshtain and Gibton, 2018).

Worry as achievement, on the other hand, is linked to external expectations and performance pressures. It is aligned with existing literature on the growing intensification of accountability pressures in education (Constantinides, 2022; Mitani, 2018), where principals are expected to ensure high academic performance, implement reforms, and navigate shifting policy landscapes (Camphuijsen, 2021; McKillop and Moorosi, 2017). These findings extend prior research about principals’ accountability (Mitani, 2018; Shirrell, 2016) by showing that principals internalize these pressures through emotions of anticipatory concern, self-judgment, and vulnerability. Across both sources, worry is shaped by a complex interplay between personal values and external demands, positioning it as a defining feature of leadership in high-stakes contexts.

The second major contribution concerns how principals interpret these worries. Appraisal processes help explain why different situations trigger different emotional reactions and how principals make sense of these demands. Drawing on Appraisal Theory (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984), worry emerges when individuals perceive a situation as uncertain, personally significant, and difficult to control. The current model expands this framework by identifying two distinctive appraisal routes for school leadership: a moral appraisal, linked to internal responsibility for students and staff, and a performance-based appraisal, tied to external expectations and accountability pressures.

Worry rooted in internal responsibility is appraised as a moral obligation. Principals evaluate concerns such as student safety, staff well-being, or school functioning as central to their identity and values. Because these responsibilities are personally meaningful yet often exceed their formal authority, principals appraise them as highly important but structurally unmanageable. Worry driven by external accountability, in contrast, is appraised through a performance lens, shaped by public expectations, institutional demands, and reputational risk. These conditions produce worry because they threaten principals’ sense of professional legitimacy while offering little room for agency or input (Tal and Tubin, 2021). Across both pathways, the findings show that persistent worry arises not from the demands themselves but from how principals appraise their meaning, uncertainty, and solvability (Paulsen, 2025). This helps explain why worry endures even when principals cannot directly intervene: it is driven by the meaning they assign to the responsibility, not only by the objective level of control they have over the situation.

Additionally, the study identified several coping strategies that principals employed to manage their sense of worry. These included active problem-solving, seeking support and building trust, as well as creating personal moments of calm. The principals’ use of active problem-solving, in which they broke down concerns and addressed them step by step, illustrates how worry can foster focused alertness and goal-directed thinking (Ojala et al., 2021; Parmentier et al., 2024). Rather than being paralyzed by uncertainty, the principals leveraged their worry as a motivator for action and as a tool for organizing their decision-making in high-stakes environments. Many principals also emphasized the importance of trusted relationships with colleagues and family as a key interpersonal coping strategy. Relying on these social networks helped reduce feelings of isolation and the emotional burden of responsibility, while also fostering a sense of shared understanding. This pattern aligns with research suggesting that worry often leads individuals to seek reassurance and guidance, thereby mitigating cognitive and emotional strain (Armitage, 2025; Borkovec et al., 1998). Additionally, principals described engaging in calming activities such as walking, listening to music, or spending time with friends. These self-soothing practices highlight the emotion-regulating function of worry, which can act as an internal signal prompting the need for psychological balance and recovery (Borkovec et al., 1998).

Taken together, these coping strategies reveal that worry in school leadership is not merely a reactive response but part of a broader meaning-making cycle. Worry alerts principals to what they value, directs their attention to potential risks, guides their choice of coping strategies, and supports both psychological recovery and more intentional leadership practice. Rather than viewing worry as purely detrimental, these findings position it as a constructive and adaptive emotional process; one that helps principals navigate the complex, uncertain, and morally charged realities of school leadership (Borkovec et al., 1998; Vazard, 2024; Yip et al., 2020).

Finally, the findings extend psychological theories that conceptualize worry as a future-oriented, anticipatory cognitive process focused on perceived threats (Armitage, 2025; Borkovec et al., 1998; Paulsen, 2025). This study advances that definition by showing that in educational leadership, worry is structured by role-based moral responsibility, institutional accountability, and persistent uncertainty. Rather than arising from isolated stressors, worry functions as a sustained form of leadership sensemaking through which principals evaluate potential future consequences under conditions of limited control and high ethical stakes. The coping strategies identified further clarify this theoretical extension. They demonstrate that worry in school leadership operates as a regulatory and problem-solving process that supports anticipatory planning, emotional regulation, and continued engagement with complex demands (Borkovec et al., 1998; Ojala et al., 2021; Parmentier et al., 2024). Together, these findings reposition worry as a context-embedded and adaptive leadership process, extending beyond traditional stress or anxiety frameworks and highlighting its role in sustaining intentional leadership practice in morally and organizationally complex school environments (Vazard, 2024; Yip et al., 2020).

Practical implications and future research

This study offers several practical recommendations. First, the findings highlight the importance of emotional preparedness in leadership roles. Professional development programs should integrate components on emotional regulation, stress appraisal, and cognitive coping strategies to help principals manage worry productively. Establishing formal structures for peer dialogue, such as leadership circles or supervision groups, may also reduce the sense of isolation often associated with worry. These platforms can provide emotional validation, shared problem-solving, and opportunities for reflective practice. Additionally, supervisors and policymakers should recognize and affirm the emotional complexity of school leadership, moving beyond performance metrics to include well-being indicators in principal evaluations and support systems.

Despite its contributions, this study has several limitations that point to directions for future research. First, while the sample focused on elementary school principals, worry may manifest differently in middle and high school leadership contexts, where organizational complexity and public scrutiny may vary. Comparative studies across educational levels could shed light on these differences. Second, this study offers a cross-sectional snapshot of worry in school leadership. Longitudinal research is needed to examine how worry evolves over time, particularly in response to policy reforms, leadership transitions, or crisis events. Tracking these changes could reveal how worry functions not just as a reactive emotion but as a sustained leadership condition.

Third, the study did not assess contextual or individual factors that may shape principals’ worry and coping. School socioeconomic context and resource availability, as well as individual characteristics such as tolerance for uncertainty, may influence how worry is appraised and managed. Future research incorporating these variables could refine the understanding of leadership-related worry and help distinguish between situational and dispositional influences. Fourth, future studies could use mixed-method designs to extend the typology and appraisal framework developed in this study. Qualitative insights could be combined with quantitative measures to examine how common different types of worry are among principals and how they relate to organizational conditions such as accountability and autonomy. Using both approaches would strengthen the evidence base and support further refinement of the conceptual model. Finally, because this study was conducted in Israel's centralized education system, future research should examine principals’ worry in other governance contexts, including more decentralized systems. Comparative and cross-cultural studies could clarify how institutional structures and sociocultural norms shape the appraisal and coping of leadership-related worry.

Conclusion

This study contributes to the theoretical understanding of emotional experiences in school leadership by offering a nuanced conceptualization of principals’ worry. It advances existing frameworks by positioning worry as a central construct in school leadership, distinct from general stress or anxiety. By integrating Appraisal Theory (Lazarus and Folkman, 1984) and Role Theory (Kahn et al., 1964), the study provides a novel lens through which to understand how principals interpret complex demands and navigate emotional tensions. In this context, worry emerges as both a consequence of role conflict and a form of adaptive sensemaking in environments characterized by limited authority and high accountability (Elomaa et al., 2023).

In addition, the study introduces a typology of leadership-related worry that distinguishes between worry as responsibility and worry as achievement. Through this distinction, it extends existing psychological conceptualizations of worry (e.g. Armitage, 2025; Borkovec et al., 1998) into the domain of educational leadership, highlighting its role as both a cognitive planning process and a signal for emotional regulation. From a practical perspective, differentiating between types of worry enables principals and support systems to engage with worry as a resource for reflective leadership and to develop more targeted forms of intervention.

Footnotes

ORCID iD

Peleg Dor-Haim

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author biography

Peleg Dor-Haim is a senior faculty member at the School of Education, Tel Aviv University. His research focuses on the emotional dimensions of educational leadership, examining how principals, vice-principals, and teachers experience emotions such as loneliness, frustration, courage, and self-fulfillment within organizational contexts. Adopting a qualitative and systemic perspective, his work explores the relationship between emotions, resilience, and educational administration.

Appendix

Interview Protocol

(1) Establishing Rapport between the Interviewee and the Interviewer

Please describe your responsibilities and duties as a school principal.

What aspects of your role do you find manageable, and what challenges do you encounter in your work?

(2) Exploring a Sense of Worry Among Elementary School Principals

Some school principals report experiencing a sense of worry in their leadership roles. To what extent does this reflect your own experience?

How would you describe the experience of worry in the context of school leadership? How can this experience be characterized or defined?

What factors do you believe contribute to feelings of worry in school leadership?

Please reflect on situations in which you have felt worried during your professional role as school principal. Can you describe a specific incident in which you experienced worry during your work as a principal?

Can you describe your emotional experience during this incident? What do you believe contributed to this feeling?

Please describe the strategies you have used to cope with feelings of worry in your leadership role.

References

Adolphs

(2013) The biology of fear. Current Biology 23(2): 79–93.

Arar

(2017) Emotional expression at different managerial career stages: Female principals in Arab schools in Israel. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 45(6): 929–943.

Armitage

(2025) The nature of worry (ing). Review of Philosophy and Psychology 16(3): 833–853.

Borkovec

Ray

Stöber

(1998) Worry: A cognitive phenomenon intimately linked to affective, physiological, and interpersonal behavioral processes. Cognitive Therapy and Research 22(6): 561–576. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018790003416 .

Bush

(2012) Authenticity in research: Reliability, validity and triangulation. Research Methods in Educational Leadership and Management 6(19): 75–89.

Camphuijsen

(2021) Coping with performance expectations: Towards a deeper understanding of variation in school principals’ responses to accountability demands. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability 33(3): 427–453.

Central Bureau of Statistics (2026) Trends and Indicators Among School Principals, 1991-2026. www.cbs.gov.il.

Chan

Jiang

Chandler

, et al. (2019) School principals’ self-perceptions of their roles and responsibilities in six countries. New Waves Educational Research and Development 22(2): 37–61.

Charmaz

(2014) Constructing Grounded Theory, 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications.

10.

Constantinides

(2022) High-stakes accountability policies and local adaptation: Exploring how school principals respond to multiple policy demands. School Leadership and Management 42(2): 170–187.

11.

Creswell

Poth

(2018) Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

12.

Dor-Haim

(2022) Educational leaders’ coping with loneliness: The unique perspective of school principals and vice-principals. Journal of Professional Capital and Community 7(3): 290–304.

13.

Dor-Haim P (2023) A rickety bridge: The complexities of vice-principals' interactions with principals and teachers in Israel. Journal of Educational Administration 61(6): 698–712. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-05-2023-0112

14.

Dor-Haim P (2024) Unveiling frustration: An exploration of principals' frustration in special education schools for complex disabilities. Journal of Professional Capital and Community 9(3): 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPCC-01-2024-0004

15.

Dor–Haim P (2025a) Navigating frustration: A comparative analysis of coping strategies among special education and elementary school principals. Journal of Educational Administration and History 57(3): 299–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2025.2467730

16.

Dor-Haim P (2025b) Promoters and barriers of self-fulfilment: Insights from special education principals. International Journal of Educational Management 39(4): 989–1004. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-09-2024-0596

17.

Dor-Haim

Nir

(2025) Perceptions of courage: Elementary school leaders’ perspectives. Educational Management Administration and Leadership 53(3): 625–640.

18.

Doyle Fosco

Brown

Schussler

(2025) Factors affecting educational leader wellbeing: Sources of stress and self-care. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 53(3): 582–601.

19.

Elomaa

Eskelä-Haapanen

Pakarinen

, et al. (2023) Work-related stress of elementary school principals in Finland: Coping strategies and support. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 51(4): 868–888.

20.

Grinshtain

Gibton

(2018) Responsibility, authority, and accountability in school-based and non-school-based management: Principals’ coping strategies. Journal of Educational Administration 56(1): 2–17.

21.

Gronn

(2009) Emotional engagement with leadership. In: Emotional Dimensions of Educational Administration and Leadership. London: Routledge, 198–211.

22.

Hallinger

(2018) Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 46(1): 5–24.

23.

Josselson

(2013) Interviewing for Qualitative Inquiry: A Relational Approach. New York: Guilford Press.

24.

Kahn

Wolfe

Quinn

, et al. (1964) Organizational Stress: Studies in Role Conflict and Ambiguity. New York: Wiley.

25.

Kurth

(2018) The Anxious Mind: An Investigation into the Nature of Anxiety. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

26.

Lazarus

Folkman

(1984) Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York: Springer.

27.

Marshall

Rossman

Blanco

(2022) Designing Qualitative Research, 7th ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

28.

McKillop

Moorosi

(2017) Career development of English female headteachers: Influences, decisions and perceptions. School Leadership and Management 37(4): 334–353.

29.

Mitani

(2018) Principals’ working conditions, job stress, and turnover behaviors under NCLB accountability pressure. Educational Administration Quarterly 54(5): 822–862.

30.

Ojala

Cunsolo

Ogunbode

, et al. (2021) Anxiety, worry, and grief in a time of environmental and climate crisis: A narrative review. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 46(1): 35–58.

31.

Oplatka

Oren

(2020) The emotion of fear among schoolteachers: Sources and coping strategies. Educational Studies 46(1): 92–105.

32.

Padhi

(2010) The eight elements of TQM. iSixSigma. Available at: http://www.isixsigma.com/methodology/total-quality-management-tqm/eight-elements-tqm/.

33.

Parmentier

Weiss

Aroua

, et al. (2024) The influence of environmental crisis perception and trait anxiety on the level of eco-worry and climate anxiety. Journal of Anxiety Disorders 101: 102799.

34.

Patton

(2014) Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

35.

Paulsen

(2025) Why We Worry: A Sociological Explanation. London, UK: Taylor & Francis, p.256.

36.

Pinto

M (

2015

) The leadership behaviors and practices of secondary principals and the effect on California's high school dropout rate.

Doctoral dissertation. University of La Verne, La Verne, CA, USA.

37.

Raihani (2008) An Indonesian model of successful school leadership. Journal of Educational Administration 46(4): 481–496.

38.

Reid

(2022) Suppressing and sharing: How school principals manage stress and anxiety during COVID-19. School Leadership & Management 42(1): 62–78.

39.

Schmidt

(2009) Accountability and the educational leader: Where does fear fit in? In: Samier

Schmidt

(eds) Emotional Dimensions of Educational Leadership and Administration. London: Routledge, 145–159.

40.

Shirrell

(2016) New principals, accountability, and commitment in low-performing schools. Journal of Educational Administration 54(5): 558–574.

41.

Sibisanu

Cseminschi

Ionica

, et al. (2024) Investigating school principals’ burnout: A cross-cultural perspective on stress, sustainability, and organizational climate. Sustainability 16(16): 7016.

42.

Spillane

Lee

(2014) Novice school principals’ sense of ultimate responsibility: Problems of practice in transitioning to the principal’s office. Educational Administration Quarterly 50(3): 431–465.

43.

Strauss

Corbin

(1990) Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory, Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

44.

Tal

Tubin

(2021) Institutional legitimacy and de-legitimacy: Insights from the case of an innovative school. International Studies in Sociology of Education 32(4): 879–901.

45.

Tamadoni

Hosseingholizadeh

Bellibaş

MŞ

(2024) A systematic review of key contextual challenges facing school principals: Research-informed coping solutions. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 52(1): 116–150.

46.

Taxer

Frenzel

(2015) Facets of teachers’ emotional lives: A quantitative investigation of teachers’ genuine, faked, and hidden emotions. Teaching and Teacher Education 49: 78–88.

47.

Thambi

(2020

) School leaders’ perceptions of fear: An interpretative phenomenological study.

Doctoral dissertation. Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

48.

Tintoré

Cunha

Cabral

Alves

JJM

(2020) A scoping review of problems and challenges faced by school leaders (2003–2019). Educational Management Administration & Leadership 50(4): 536–573. DOI: 10.1177/1741143220942527.

49.

Vazard

(2024) Feeling the unknown: Emotions of uncertainty and their valence. Erkenntnis 89(4): 1275–1294.

50.

Walker

(2020) “God is my doctor”: Mindfulness meditation/prayer as a spiritual well-being coping strategy for Jamaican school principals to manage their work-related stress and anxiety. Journal of Educational Administration 58(4): 467–480.

51.

Wells

Klocko

(2018) Principal well-being and resilience: Mindfulness as a means to an end. NASSP Bulletin 102(2): 161–173.

52.

Yin

(2018) Case study research and applications (Vol. 6). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

53.

Yip

Levine

Brooks

, et al. (2020) Worry at work: How organizational culture promotes anxiety. Research in Organizational Behavior 40: 100124.