In this post I will be looking at the work of Artz, Goodall, et al. (2017) and the relationship
between ‘boss competence and worker-well being.
The relationship between 'boss competence and teacher well-being' is particularly relevant to schools given concerns about both
teacher workload, stress-levels and well being and the number of teachers leaving the teaching profession. I’ll then go onto explore some of the possible implications of the research for schools and school leaders. Finally, I'll undertake a structured critique of Artz et al's research.
Boss competence and
worker well-being: a brief summary of the research.
Artz, Goodall, et al. (2017
state that:
- Nearly all workers have a supervisor or “boss.”
- Little is known about how bosses influence the quality of employees’ lives.
- A boss’s technical competence is the single strongest predictor of a worker’s job satisfaction.
- If a worker stays in the same job and workplace, a rise in the competence of a supervisor is associated with an improvement in the worker’s well-being.
- In a cross-section of 6000 young U.S. workers, the job satisfaction of employees is positively associated with whether the supervisor worked his or her way up within the company (or started the company).
- In a cross-section of 1600 British workers, satisfaction levels are higher among individuals whose supervisor could if necessary step in competently to do that job.
- In pooled cross- sections totalling 27,000 individuals, workers’ job satisfaction is highly correlated with the competence of supervisors.
- These results support the claim that both competence – linked to expert knowledge – and industry experience improve workers’ job satisfaction.
Some possible headline
implications for schools
There are number of 'first-blush' implications for the leadership and
management of schools which members of a school community may choose to draw
from these research findings. For
example
- If you want to increase the well-being of staff increase the competence of ‘bosses’ and line managers
- If you want to increase job satisfaction then internal appointments – with individuals working their way up through the school – may lead to increased job satisfaction of those they supervise.
- Senior staff within a school should keep their ‘hand-in’ as teachers to ensure they can competently cover for absent teaching colleagues.
- If you want to increase teacher well-being appoint leaders who have a background in education and schools rather than appointing someone who has generic leadership and management experience.
However, before jumping to these conclusion it is necessary to look at Artz et al's research in more detail to see whether it is useful for schools and school leaders. To help me do this I’m going to use Professor Steve Higgins 6 As model
for effective research use: accessibility, accuracy, appropriate, acceptable, applicable,
and actionable
The 6 A’s
Accessibility – given the very high level maths involved in the paper, the research is not easily intellectually accessible to school leaders and others interested
in teacher well-bing
Accuracy – again this is extremely difficult for the lay
reader to judge. However, the authors do
identify some significant limitations in the report, for example, what is meant
by boss competence is not clear; there is no reliable and valid instrument to
measure boss competence; many of the measures used for boss competence where
highly subjective; insufficient attention was paid to external factors that may
be influencing both perceptions of boss competence and ‘well-being.’
Appropriate – although multiple sources of evidence were
used, none of the evidence used appeared to be generated from research into
schools and other similar environments.
Acceptable – the findings of the research would appear to be
at first sight to be broadly consistent with teachers values and beliefs – i.e.
to be a senior leader must still be competent in the classroom.
Applicable – the research is relevant to schools given
concerns about both teaching staff retention and well-being.
Actionable – the research does not appear to meet Argyris (2000)
criteria for actionable advice in that it does not, ‘specifies
the detailed, concrete behaviours required to achieve the intended
consequences; it must be crafted in the form of designs that contain causal
statements; people must have, or be able to be taught, the concepts and
the skills required to implement those causal statements; and the
context in which it is to be implemented does not prevents its implementation’.
p8
So what can we make of the research and the implications for schools
Nevertheless for me, the main value of Artz, et al. (2017) is that it directed my attention to a topic
known as ‘expert leadership’ and the work of Goodall and Bäker (2015). Now, one of the key
questions ‘expert leadership’ seeks to
explore is whether experts and professionals – such as teachers and headteachers
- need to be led by other experts and professionals, those who have a deep
understanding of and high ability in the core-business of their organization. In future posts I will examine the notion ‘expert
leadership’ and its implications for schools in more detail.
References
Argyris, C. (2000). Flawed Advice and the Management Trap: How Managers Can Know When
They're Getting Good Advice and When They're Not. Oxford. Oxford University
Press.
Artz, B.
M., Goodall, A. H. and Oswald, A. J. (2017). Boss Competence and Worker Well-Being. ILR Review. 70. 2. 419-450.
Goodall,
A. H. and Bäker, A. (2015). A Theory
Exploring How Expert Leaders Influence Performance in Knowledge-Intensive
Organizations. in Incentives and
Performance. Springer.
