This article was downloaded by: [University of Birmingham]On: 12 November 2014, At: 20:28Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Leadership inEducation: Theory and PracticePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tedl20

Narrative leadership in a qualityorganization: a meaningful alternativeto management by measurementBuddy FischPublished online: 02 May 2013.

To cite this article: Buddy Fisch (2014) Narrative leadership in a quality organization: a meaningfulalternative to management by measurement, International Journal of Leadership in Education:Theory and Practice, 17:2, 154-173, DOI: 10.1080/13603124.2013.792394

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2013.792394

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Narrative leadership in a quality organization: a

meaningful alternative to management by

measurement

BUDDY FISCH

In the wake of teacher evaluation and performance pay legislation in the USA, an unprece-dented cheating scandal in the Atlanta Public School System, and similar smaller testingscandals elsewhere, the effectiveness of school improvement models based on measuringstandardized testing results is now a concern. This article addresses this concern by build-ing on research that describes a successful accreditation approach using storytelling in aschool-wide portfolio framework. The evaluation of this relational approach to accreditationlaid the foundation for this examination of an organizational semiotic model of narrativeleadership. In this study, I answer two overarching research questions: (1) how does a storyconstruct narrative leadership? and (2) how does narrative leadership socially construct aquality organization through storytelling? This investigation validates narrative leadership asan effective alternative to the management-by-measurement approach to school improve-ment and as a way to construct quality organizations for the twenty-first century.

The changing economic climate is creating a political willingness in theUSA for implementing teacher evaluation and performance pay schemesbased on student summative assessments. This is in an attempt to manageresults by measuring quality in schools. Managing high-stakes testingresults is seemingly the panacea for solving problems with educationalquality in America. Yet, despite the massive standardized testing cheatingscandal in the Atlanta Public School System, similar smaller cheatingscandals elsewhere, and the weight of literature emphasizing leadershipfor improving organizational quality during times of change, it seems asthough management through measurement, the very expression of moder-nity, remains firmly entrenched. What happened to promising leadershipnotions for the emerging Conceptual Age that stress meaning-making, bigpicture thinking and storytelling capabilities (Pink, 2006)? It appears thatschool improvement is still closely tied to traditional quantitative methodsand models.

Buddy Fisch, PhD, is a social studies teacher at North Hall Middle School, 4856 Rilla Road,

Gainesville, GA 30506, USA. Email: buddy_fisch@yahoo.com. He has research interest in

organizational change and taught leadership principles and organization theory in the Department of

Psychology and Sociology at the University of North Georgia, Dahlonega, GA, USA. He has also

taught in the Graduate School of Education at Brenau University, Gainesville, GA, USA.

INT. J. LEADERSHIP IN EDUCATION, 2014

Vol. 17, No. 2, 154–173, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2013.792394

� 2013 Taylor & Francis

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Johnson and Broms (2000) believed that this kind of thinking derivesfrom the Newtonian-Cartesian perspective, which views the universe assimilar to a machine. A machine manifests order by having an externaldesign imposed on all of its parts. These authors felt that leaders whounconsciously conform to a mechanistic view see organizations asmachines and personnel as inanimate cogs within its gears. In effect, theorganization is perceived to be the sum of its parts and the parts them-selves are perceived as not intrinsically related and independent. Suchleaders may think that the best way to reach a goal in the organization isto have each part——individual, division, or branch——focus on attainingspecific quantitative targets that are planned to tally up to the preferredoverall results. The tragedy of this kind of thinking, these authors con-tend, is that quantitative measures only determine action in mechanisticsystems. Logically, they are not to be used to change results in adaptive,multidimensional, self-organizing systems like organizations where qualita-tive patterns characterize all organizations’ internal operations. Ignoranceof these patterns results in harmful and irrelevant decisions.

According to Johnson and Broms (2000), announcing a quantitativedecision is simple for business leaders or government officials. They canapprove investments, change tax rates, or attempt to control results bymanipulating the contributions of each of the parts using performance-based compensation plans intending to reach a long-term goal. However,imposing a quantitative target on an organization is ill-advised becauserelationships characterize living systems and the qualitative patternsmanifested through these relationships affect organizations and their ends.Johnson and Broms felt that attempts to control quantitative resultsthrough interventions like performance-based evaluation and pay onlysucceed in disrupting the relationships in organizations. Relationshipsunderstood as qualitative patterns are best conveyed through thestories humans fashion not by the quantitative measurements used bymanagement.

Scientific management is an antiquated approach to improving schoolquality for the twenty-first century (Fisch, 2010). Deming (1986) was oneof the first to identify the link between quality and leadership as a princi-ple. He intimated that quality is intrinsic and, as such, emphasizes themeaning and autonomy that only leadership can deliver. Johnson andBroms (2000) reinforced this by noting that quality cannot be improvedby reverting back to the extrinsic management methods and mechanisticsystems models of yesterday, which only serve to impede the improve-ment of organizations.

This way of thinking was grounded in earlier organizational research.Boulding (1956), in his hierarchy of systems, realized that towards thetop, systems became increasingly more complicated. At the level ofhuman beings, the complexity was overwhelming. For Boulding,approaching an understanding of human systems merely through the lensof the physical was untenable. What was needed was a different approach;one that understood humans and their organizations as symbolic andsocial living systems. Social systems, in order to thrive, need meaning,and that comes through quality and story, not through measurement.

NARRATIVE LEADERSHIP 155

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Organizations are best understood through narrative and semiot-ics——organizations as stories——and not through comparisons——a scale.Through narrative, social systems are organized by leadership using storyas structure (Pink, 2006). In other words, social organizations need themeaningful self-direction, self-determination, self-actualization and self-motivation that comes through leadership that is telling their story. Thisimplies the need for a new leadership model. What is needed is a differentapproach to complex social systems——a semiotic approach. Taking thistype of approach shows that the solution to the quality problem incontemporary schools and other institutions is not additional measure-ment by management, but rather a new approach to leadership.

Elsewhere, I (Fisch, 2010) revealed three aspects of an organizationalsemiotic model of narrative leadership. That study reported out a school’squality improvement planning process which used a portfolio approachand organizational storytelling which: (1) offered a shared vision for stake-holders of an educational organization involved in a self-review process,(2) provided a shared organizational experience for quality schoolimprovement and (3) served as a cultural symbol for a school undergoingself-evaluation. I also found that these three characteristics of the narra-tive process generated meaning for a fragmented institution and that thesehad to be present for leadership to construct a holistic organization andimprove quality in this school.

In the present study, I use the institutional data from the portfolionarrative approach to quality assessment to answer two overarching ques-tions: (1) how does a story construct narrative leadership? and (2) howdoes narrative leadership socially construct a quality organization throughstorytelling?

Foundation for the study

This research applies the ideas of Johnson and Broms (2000) on howshifting the study of work to the actual workplace highlights how theparts reflect a holistic unity and alters what is considered scientificwork. They noted how work is now centering on nurturing and understand-ing the non-quantitative relationships that exist among the parts, generallyviewed as incidental and ephemeral, instead of how the parts connectquantitatively.

Earlier, I (Fisch, 2010) described the workplace for the study: as NorthHall Middle School (NHMS) located near Gainesville, Georgia, includesgrades six through eight, with an enrollment of 851 students. The studyinvolved all of the NHMS school personnel as they were interviewed andobserved over a 10-month period while engaged in the Southern Associa-tion of Colleges and Schools (SACS) school portfolio process. This processincluded the individual committee members collaboratively co-writing eachchapter or section of the school’s story, along with a team of coordinatorswho developed the overall narrative that was captured through the portfolioapproach. Observations were undertaken of the seven committees responsi-

156 B. FISCH

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

ble for each of the sections of the school portfolio, the NHMS schoolportfolio steering committee and all of these committees meeting collec-tively. I interviewed the coordinators of the seven committees, all threeschool administrators and the faculty and parents who were on these com-mittees. Special attention was given to the meaningful effects that the actualstory and this accreditation practice were having on all of these organiza-tional stakeholders.

Narrative leadership and accreditation

The benefits of narrative leadership practice are being recognized by agen-cies for the accreditation of public schools and other institutions for USeducation, including the SACS. SACS is applying the narrative frame-work to a new context: accreditation. Accreditation is a voluntary methodof quality assurance that engages participants of the entire school commu-nity within a continuous process of reflection, self-evaluation andimprovement (AdvancED, 2008). It is open to constructive peer feedbackand external scrutiny, is rigorous and data based and utilizes a disciplinedapproach to documenting results (AdvancED, 2008).

Narrative leadership fosters meaning by using the school portfolio

The narrative framework used for accreditation in this research is a schoolportfolio. Bernhardt (1999) felt that a need existed in the accreditationreview process for alternative quality school improvement planning frame-works. One alternative used by some educational institutions is the schoolportfolio.

Bernhardt (1999) was a strong proponent of this option. She arguedthat, due to the comprehensive nature of school portfolios and their focuson an inclusive school-wide improvement plan, they are viable alternativesto traditional accreditation and evaluation processes. She proposed thateducators could achieve their vision if they concentrated on one compre-hensive school plan that was congruent with implementing that school-wide vision. Collins and Porras (1997) believed that an aspect of vision isa vivid description of how the organization would look in the future onceit had accomplished its mission. They felt that this mental image orpicture was essential to achieving high organizational performance,because it created an emotional commitment in people by releasing theirpassion and encouraging them in their aspirations. Bernhardt noted thatpeople involved in the vision implementation process enjoy the personalmeaning-making that comes with the school portfolio process.

A school portfolio is ‘a purposeful collection of work that tells thestory of a school and the staff’s systemic continuous improvement effortsto better serve their clients——the students’ (Bernhardt et al., 2000, p. 5).The narrative leadership practice of organizational storytelling through theschool portfolio facilitates implementation of a school improvement planthat can actualize the school’s vision.

NARRATIVE LEADERSHIP 157

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Narrative leadership shares vision through the school portfolio

Bernhardt (1999) believed that the job of leadership in a school that iscontinuously improving is to help the individuals in the organization real-ize their part in the process to implement the vision. Whether or not thisis occurring may be discovered by using the school portfolio qualityschool improvement planning framework. Those in schools may greatlybenefit from telling and hearing their story. They may also benefit fromthe meaning derived from a vision that is reconsidered, shared and evenrecast through narrative leadership.

Narrative leadership uses the continuous improvement continuums forschool improvement

Narrative leadership may borrow from techniques and processes of thecontinuous improvement continua. The continuous improvementcontinua were adapted from the Malcolm Baldrige National QualityAward Programme (Bernhardt, 1999). They provide a context thatpromotes influential interpersonal relationships within an organization tobring about the organizational experiences necessary for the creation ofmeaningful narrative.

Bernhardt (2002) stated that the continuous improvement continuarepresent the theoretical flow of systemic school improvement in usingseven rubrics which contribute to organizational change.

I show in the following example how the continuous improvementcontinua helped foster change in a school and its stakeholders throughimproving relationships, capacity and competency by comments providedfrom one faculty member who served as a committee coordinator for partof the school’s portfolio review process:

So when you have … this SACS report where we have written down our goals [by using the

continuous improvement continua], then it helps them [teachers] to convey to the public, those

outside, they are not just writers of this, they are participators. … We, this document, makes

us stand by what we say … It is more becoming our reality. It falls back again on what we state

in that document, what we see ourselves as, presently, and what we hope we see ourselves as

in the future. So administrators can look at that, and guide us, monitor us, until we become

what we say we want to become.

This committee coordinator believed that narrative leadership produceschange through a process using the continuous improvement continua. Icame to understand through his experience just how narrative leadershipbuilds relationships, capacity and competence in school stakeholders; howit engenders the continuous quality educational improvement necessaryfor meaningful organizational change to occur.

In sum, the narrative framework used for accreditation referenced inthis research is a school portfolio which facilitates the construction ofquality organizations and leadership. This occurs as meaning is derivedfrom a vision that is reconsidered, shared and even recast through narra-tive leadership.

158 B. FISCH

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Overview of narrative and leadership

A narrative leadership perspective

Language is what constructs meaning in societies (Veith, 1994) and iscentral to the processes constructing organizational realities (Musson &Cohen, 1999). Veith noted that humans construct models——whetherscientific theories or worldviews——to explain their experiences. He believedthat these models are texts that are continually being revised. All humanconventions such as worldviews, institutions and organizations are essen-tially linguistic constructs, texts, or narratives (Hatch, 1997; Veith, 1994).

Czarniawska (1997) suggested that bringing organizational studiescloser to literary theory would make us aware of how storytelling con-structs lives and leadership through narrative. Narrative and story aredefined by Polkinghorne (1988, p. 13) as ‘the fundamental scheme forlinking individual human actions and events into interrelated aspects ofan understandable composite’. The relating capacity of narrative leader-ship is needed to cohere a contemporary society that reflects its frag-mented nature through a highly competitive communication atmosphereof considerable hype, spin and special interests (Fisch, 2010). Within thisenvironment, narrative leadership can help construct an understandablesocial composite or a quality organization. This is important becausequality in organizations is a matter of excellence, value and nuance——it isa question of meanings (Patton, 2002).

Bennis and Nanus felt that leadership is the skill to organize and influ-ence meaning for organizational members (Peters, 1987). The organization’sstory is what initially makes leadership meaningful and then inspires thosepractising leadership to construct meaning for others (Lambert et al., 1995).

Narrative leadership shares vision to provide organizational meaningand purpose

Manz and Sims (1991) believed that meaning-making or sense-making(Boyce, 1995) in the workplace is the greatest need of contemporaryorganizations. Narrative can and has become a powerful tool in the con-struction of meaning in schools when those practicing leadership sharevision through organizational storytelling (Lambert et al., 1995). Narrativeleadership that uses this approach conforms to the theory of transforma-tional leadership (Bass & Avolio, 1994), which uses vision to develop orga-nizational culture by inspiring personnel through meaning-making.According to Wheatley (1994), where there is meaning, purpose permeatesan organization. Purpose can be understood as an outgrowth of an organi-zation’s values and beliefs by crowning the organization’s guiding philoso-phy (Collins & Porras, 1997) as the core reason the organization exists(Bernhardt, 2002). Leadership communicates organizational purpose andmeaning by applying the governing principle of establishing a few rulesmembers can use to guide their behaviour (i.e. strong values, organiza-tional beliefs and guiding visions). Narrative leadership primarily makes

NARRATIVE LEADERSHIP 159

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

meaning by effectively communicating the organization’s story in order toconvey its vision, identity (Keel, 2007) and purpose to its personnel and tothe society at large.

Narrative leadership constructs a self-organizing system

Wheatley (1994) suggested that purpose produces the capacity for self-reference in organizational members, a capacity inherent in a self-organiz-ing system. A self-organizing system maintains its structure and someenvironmental independence because each individual part freely expressesitself in the system’s context (Wheatley, 1994). Parts of the system (e.g.stakeholders) self-organize as an embodied pattern (i.e. fractals) found inthe whole recursive system (Johnson & Broms, 2000). A recursive systemis one in which the self-organizing linear process naturally combines withthe relational cyclical process to generate or reproduce continual newness(Johnson & Broms, 2000).

The school portfolio, through organizational storytelling, helps createa self-organizing system by providing self-reference (i.e. mental images,thoughts, or concepts in persons). Concepts provide the context (i.e. asimilar mental experience in the other) that enables the system to organizeitself. Lambert et al. (1995) and Pink (2006) believed narrative communi-cates concepts in organizations. Narrative leadership makes these conceptsavailable through self-reference.

Manz and Sims (1991, p. 6) believed that leadership stems from thissense of self-reference or autonomy from within a person. This is ‘self-leadership’. Self-leadership comes from the influence we use on ourselvesto accomplish a personally acceptable level of self-direction and self-moti-vation (Manz & Sims, 1991). This intrinsic motivation is a product ofnarrative leadership. Narrative leadership can motivate personnel usingthe school portfolio process to construct a conceptual, meaningful andpurposeful self-organizing social system. The school portfolio provides forthe self-referential context essential to a quality school.

As an example, we have this committee coordinator’s report:

It’s a narrative, narration. It follows a storyline. It makes you come back, and remember,

reflect, and proceed from there … Being part of the process makes it more clear, you’re part of

it. You have to participate. … I think we are all on the same page, and you know what every-

body wants, and understand exactly what you’re here for … It [the school portfolio] definitely

creates a purpose. If you have a story, you have a beginning, middle, and an end. If you want

that “happily ever after” you have to have a goal, a purpose, an objective. I believe [the school

portfolio does this] better than anything we’ve seen up to this point … We are all characters in

the story … [The school portfolio] becomes reality. We are living the story. It is reality because

it is what we are doing. It is what we are, it’s what we want to be … I guess reality and truth is

synonymous here, reality is truth.

This committee coordinator felt that he shapes and becomes part of theorganization through the narrative process. You can see, from his explana-tion, how the story created a sense of emotional well-being, self-reference,autonomy, or purpose and thus became reality for him and other schoolstakeholders.

160 B. FISCH

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Narrative leadership is constructivist

Lambert et al. (1995, p. 52) called leadership that communicates purposeconstructivist and defined it as ‘the reciprocal processes that enableparticipants in the educational community to construct meaning toward acommon purpose of schooling’. Rauch and Behling (1984, p. 46) statedthat leadership is ‘the process of influencing an organized group towardaccomplishing its goals’. Applying these notions of process and influenceto the organizational storytelling context, Lambert et al. (1995, p. 123)stated that ‘narrative and dialogue provide the reciprocal processes essen-tial to constructivist leadership’. In effect, leadership enables school par-ticipants to construct meaning around a common purpose of schooling.

Narrative leadership and organizational semiotics

Related to organizational storytelling is organizational semiotics, whichseeks to understand organizations based on communication, texts andsigns (Gazendam, Jorna, & Cijsouw, 2003). Gazendam et al. believed thatthe goals of this is to show what is being done when trying to design,understand, or change organizations using metaphors and models. Theynoted that this is undertaken so that people are freed from the trap of(unconsciously) using a particular type of model or metaphor when tryingto understand organizations. The ensuing findings support the develop-ment of a model for narrative leadership based on a social metaphor fororganizations. At the heart of the semiotic approach is a story.

Narrative leadership and the Meaning Triangle

Littlejohn (1983) noted that meaning, in its first sense, is representational.He explained that this representation is of an event, condition or objectusing signs that stand for things in a person’s mind. Richards believedthat signs in a system are language, and that language signs as symbolsbecome instruments of communication and thought. Language cannotlogically be separated from meaning, and meaning is the bridge betweenpeople and symbols.

Ogden and Richards (1923/1989) believed that in order for languageto elicit meaning in people, certain cognitive processes need to take place.Eliciting meaning in the human being is the result of the cognitiveprocesses that occur when using natural language between an actualthing, its mental representation and its symbol. This phenomenon is bestdescribed by the following Meaning Triangle (Ogden & Richards, 1923/1989, p. 11) (see Figure 1).

The Meaning Triangle models three dimensions of meaning: first, thesymbolic meaning; second, the referent; and last, the self-reference or themeaning to the person. The symbol and the thought (reference) aredirectly related, as are the referent and the reference; but, the symbol andthe referent (thing) are indirectly related. This indirect relationship is an

NARRATIVE LEADERSHIP 161

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

imputed one and is only validated by the medium of thought in theperson (Littlejohn, 1983).

Littlejohn (1983) uses the word cat as an example. The actual animal(thing) is the referent. The symbol (sign) is C-A-T, and the mentalimage, picture, thought (representation) and concept of the animal is theself-reference that is displayed in the person’s mind when the word isheard or seen. The connection between sign and referent only happensthrough the thought in the person about the animal. The relationshipbetween C-A-T and the actual animal is, therefore, indirect, even thougheither elicits the mental image in the person. This explains how naturallanguage elicits meaning in a person.

In the report that follows, an organizational semiotic model of narra-tive leadership builds on this understanding of natural language. Itemerges from this as a story metaphor.

Conducting the study

For the study, three primary means of data collection were used: interviewswith school personnel and parents, participant observation and documentanalysis. In addition, analysis of the previous school improvement planningprocess document in comparison with the actual school portfolio narrativewas undertaken. The Constant comparative method (Glaser & Strauss,1967) and narrative analysis (Merriam, 1998; Patton, 2002; Polkinghorne,1995) were used to analyse this case record.

Findings

Two primary findings are taken from the case data and are illustrated inthe following organizational semiotic model based on the MeaningTriangle (Figure 1).

Figure 1. The Meaning Triangle. From The Meaning of Meaning, by Ogden andRichards. Copyright � 1923/1989. Reprinted by permission of Houghton Mifflin

Harcourt

162 B. FISCH

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Finding 1: narrative leadership is constructed by an organization’sstory

The NHMS Leadership Triangle (Figure 2), which applies the MeaningTriangle (Figure 1) to the school portfolio process, represents how narra-tive leadership is constructed by an organization’s story. As Figure 2demonstrates, people in educational leadership positions tend to use theunique school story as the symbol, their vision as the mental image of theschool that is displayed in their mind when the school story is read or toldand their experience of the school as the actual thing. The connectionbetween the school symbol and the school experience can only occurthrough the thought, mental image, concept, or self-reference of theschool in the person(s). The reciprocating relationship between the schoolstory and the school is, therefore, indirect, though either will elicit thevision in the person. The Meaning Triangle and the related NHMS Lead-ership Triangle (Figures 1 and 2) explain how natural language elicitsmeaning in people in educational leadership positions. The naturallanguage of the school portfolio constructing meaning initially for theindividual school leader(s) reveals how narrative leadership is constructedby an organization’s story. I show in the following interview data fromschool stakeholders in leadership positions how this phenomenon issupported as it is demonstrated in the school portfolio process.

An administrator described this phenomenon:

It [the school portfolio] is me. This is me … this is the story of [administrator]. … The words

are there [in the school portfolio] just like when you look at meta-cognition and what good

readers do. And, when you think about the way you read, you are making connections, you are

making meaning out of the words you read … in fact, a piece of text becomes a living thing.

… It is an element of truth for that person. It’s that person’s perspective on things. Perspective

is your reality … We were able to put it [the SACS report] into words, and see it.

The school story, communicated through natural language, was so mean-ingful to this administrator that she directly identified with it in her lead-ership role. She went so far as to say that it was her reality.

Figure 2. The NHMS Leadership Triangle

NARRATIVE LEADERSHIP 163

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Another administrator explained how the school portfolio demonstratesnarrative constructing leadership:

[The school portfolio] made. … [stakeholders] examine their practices because it gave mean-

ing, and helps me give meaning to what they were doing.

This administrator said that the school story, written in naturallanguage, gives (i.e. elicits) meaning in school stakeholders and in her.She then began leading as a meaning-maker (i.e. she led stakeholdersthrough the process of focusing on the essence of reality in the organiza-tion through meaningful narrative).

A committee coordinator said how organizational stories constructleadership:

They’re [administrators] getting the meaning and the inspiration from the school story. It gives

them a focus, a direction. We need to be led, if we have to be led in that direction it’s from

what they glean from reading the narrative; that should inspire them.

The school story inspired or motivated, focused and directed those inleadership positions by eliciting meaning in them through naturallanguage. In sum, data from the case study of the school portfolio processestablished that natural language elicits meaning in people in educationalleadership positions.

Finding 2: narrative leadership socially constructs a quality schoolthrough the school portfolio

The school portfolio process substantiated Littlejohn’s (1983) belief thatcommunication is a process that elicits, not gives, meanings in people. Aperson’s thoughts mediate the unreliable relationship between the symboland the person. The goal of communication——creating similar mentalexperiences in others——can only be attained when past experience (to acertain degree) is shared by communicators. Communication through theschool portfolio process provides a shared organizational experience forquality school improvement and elicits meaning not only in the leadersbut also in the other members of a quality school (Fisch, 2010).

The NHMS Leadership Triangle (Figure 2) reveals how it is thatnarrative leadership socially constructs a quality school through the schoolportfolio. In this application, NHMS is the shared organizational experi-ence for quality school improvement or the influential relational founda-tion that the school portfolio provides (i.e. the referent). The NHMSvision is the shared vision that the school portfolio provides, and theschool portfolio is a cultural symbol (sign) of NHMS. The reciprocal rela-tionship between the school portfolio and NHMS is, therefore, indirect,though either will elicit the NHMS vision in the school’s stakeholders.

I demonstrate with the following data how the school portfolio processelicits meaning in NHMS stakeholders by organizational storytelling.

An administrator commented:

164 B. FISCH

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Not only is it [the school portfolio] practical, I think it’s going to become integral to school

improvement and school reform … I don’t think that you can do it [elicit or bring out meaning

in people] without a group feeling like they have made a contribution to it, that they have some

ownership. … From my perspective, it has empowered our teachers in a lot of ways, because it

has made them feel like, ‘You know what? This is not just the story of NHMS, this is the story

of this sixth grade teacher.’ They take it very personally. They could put in their name. This is

the story of blank, and every teacher in the school could put their name in that blank, and not

just NHMS … Because it happens inside first, it’s not an external thing for the members of

the organization.

This administrator believed that the school portfolio empowered stake-holders by eliciting meaning in them. It was intrinsically, not extrinsically,motivating.

This same administrator continued:

The school portfolio is me. We are one in the same … [The school portfolio process] replicates

itself when I work with a certain group of teachers. I have seen it replicate itself with the kids I

have been in consultation with.

This administrator is constructing a meaningful or quality school as aself-organizing system through the school portfolio process.

A committee coordinator commented:

I think it [the school portfolio] helps the understanding of everyone. … That understanding

fosters trust. You don’t necessarily have to agree with … why the decisions were made … They

were made because this story or data shows us that we are lacking in this area … If you under-

stand all of that, you will trust someone … If you don’t understand, then, you are not going to

invest yourself in change.

This committee coordinator reveals that promoting understandingthrough narrative leadership builds trust. It is trust that has to be presentin relationships for the school stakeholders to risk change.

Another committee member said:

It [the school portfolio process] gives you the chance to think outside the box … which taps

into the creative part of us that some of us have to have tapped …. You know, I’ve got to know

that what I do is purposeful, and is validated and is valued. And, if I don’t feel valued, I

certainly am not going to be effective. … It [the school portfolio process] empowers you to

move ahead by not discounting your past, and where you are, and where you came from.

The school portfolio process emotionally validated this committeemember by allowing her to aspire to be creative and feel more valued inher job. It empowered her to be more competent and effective by makingher job purposeful.

Lastly, a parent believed the school portfolio process unified a schoolvision:

The ones [teachers] I work with that have taught here, their vision has been in line with the

whole school and that process … I. … feel like by having that [continuous improvement

continuums] committee, if … [administrators’] vision was separate from our vision, then we

have had the opportunity to pull it all together, and make it the same vision by having input

from everybody … I got a piece of them [administrators] only because I was working so closely

with them. So I saw how passionate they were about it and dedicated. I saw them modeling it,

and I continue to see them modeling it. Now that I know what the history is, when I am out

at functions or honor awards, I see it in them, now more clearly, after having to work on that

vision.

NARRATIVE LEADERSHIP 165

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

This parent noted how important vision is to NHMS. The organizationalmeaning and passion that were created by the shared vision allowed foreffective modelling of the school portfolio by administrators, who, ineffect, replicated the narrative throughout the school because they wereemotionally invested in it. That is, they were inspired by this mentalimage of the school’s desired future state and motivated to achieve highorganizational performance because the shared vision encouraged theiraspirations. This narrative leadership practice thus facilitated qualityschool improvement at NHMS.

Discussion

The following model is a general illustration of the findings that werederived from the case study, which demonstrated that narrative leadershipsocially constructs a quality organization through an organizational story(see Figure 3).

The Organizational Semiotic Model of Narrative Leadership (Figure 3)shows three dimensions of meaning: first, the symbolic meaning, as in thecase of the school portfolio narrative serving as a cultural symbol for aschool undergoing self-evaluation (What is the meaning of the organiza-tional story?); second, the referent or thing, as in the case of the schoolportfolio providing a shared organizational experience for quality improve-ment in a school (What is the meaning of this organization?); and last,the self-reference, thought, mental image, concept or the vision in themember of the organization, as in the case of the school portfolio offeringa shared vision for the stakeholders of an educational organizationinvolved in an accreditation process (What is the meaning to you?). Theorganizational story and the shared vision are directly related, as arethe organization and the shared vision; but, the organizational story andthe organization are indirectly related. This indirect relationship is anarbitrary one, albeit reciprocal, and is only validated by the shared visionin the stakeholder(s) of the organization.

Figure 3. The Organizational Semiotic Model of Narrative Leadership

166 B. FISCH

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

This organizational semiotic model demonstrates how narrative lead-ership improves organizational quality through meaning-making bydepicting how natural language initially elicits meaning in people in lead-ership positions and thus represents how an organizational storyconstructs narrative leadership. In turn, storytelling enables narrative lead-ership to socially construct a quality organization by eliciting meaning inorganizational stakeholders. Therefore, narrative leadership, through influ-encing the reciprocal processes of storytelling, enables stakeholders of anorganization to construct meaning around a mutual purpose of improvingorganizational quality.

Leadership implications

Leadership and management

Leadership deals primarily with creating and eliciting meaning. Thisdeserves more of a qualitative approach to understanding the effectivenessof organizations.

This is in contrast to the typical notion of management by measure-ment (predominant in the industrial and technicist paradigms). Rost(1991, p. 108) stated that, ‘management is an authority relationshipbetween at least one manager and one subordinate who coordinate theiractions to produce and sell particular goods and/or services’.

Managers who use quantitative measurements find that quantity issufficient to describe external features——(e.g. performance)——and also toexplain the operations within a mechanistic system (Johnson & Broms,2000). However, quantity cannot explain how the operation of a naturalsystem (much less, a social system) works internally. Johnson and Bromsconcluded that management through quantitative measurements willnever give insight into how or why these systems function as they do andwill never provide understanding of the internal operations of these sys-tems.

Management through measurement offers few solutions to internalorganizational problems. And, according to Deming (1986), misapplyingmeasures usually leads to only more control, which manifests as fear.Senge (2000, p. xiii), citing Deming, said that, ‘if management sets quan-titative targets and makes people’s jobs depend on meeting them, “theywill likely meet the targets——even if they have to destroy the enterprise todo it”’. At the heart of this enterprise destruction, Senge believed are theruins of the relationships in the organization that once influenced thecapacity, competency and character of its members.

Goodhart’s (1984, p. 96) law states ‘that any observed statistical regu-larity will tend to collapse once pressure is placed upon it for controlpurposes’. Tienken (2011, p. 152) noted how ‘in the case of [teacher evalu-ation and] performance pay, it is the test score that becomes the “observedstatistical regularity”’. Campbell’s (1976, p. 54) law states that ‘the moreany quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, themore subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to

NARRATIVE LEADERSHIP 167

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.’ Tienkenfelt that Campbell’s law applies to high stakes testing. He believed thatschools are now experiencing a confluence of both of these laws due to thecurrent national obsession with educational measurement.

Measurement does not motivate and cannot explain involvementinside the web of relationships that affects the work and ensures that itsresults are satisfactory (Johnson & Broms, 2000). When organizationsdevelop these relationships, and see them as ‘carefully nurtureddetails——the means——as “results in the making”’ (Johnson & Broms,2000, p. 106), instead of concentrating on satisfying quantitative targets,the results will come naturally.

Senge (2000) noted that this does not mean that results do notmatter: quite the opposite. He believed that these relational insights arekey to achieving sustained and extraordinary results, because they putvalue to our aspirations——our visions. Senge concluded that our genuineaspirations uplift us and bring out the best in our creative and imaginativeefforts and in our relationships. Thus, it is vital, as Rost (1991) cautions,not to substitute management through measurement for leadership, normistake leadership as more or better management. As shown here, narra-tive leadership was essential to eliciting meaning and purpose in the orga-nization to improve, not destroy, its relationships——meaning that couldnot have been attained through measurement.

‘Denigrating management to ennoble leadership’ (Rost, 1991, p. 105)is not the intent of making these distinctions. The point is to realize thatthere is a difference between the two concepts and it is crucial to organi-zational improvement to understand their different roles and the relation-ships between them.

Vision and mission

Organizational storytelling is necessary for leadership, because the organi-zation’s story makes vision possible within organizational culture. Visionis the seat of meaning. The fundamental inspiration for leadership isvision (Hickman, 1998).

The Organizational Semiotic Model of Narrative Leadership (Figure 3)explicates how leadership is ultimately a matter of sense-making by direct-ing the focus of the stakeholders of an organization. The shared visionbecomes the vehicle for organizational sense-making and leads to mean-ingful change.

Improvement is achieved by focusing on improving the systems thatcreate results, not on the results themselves (Bernhardt, 1999). In otherwords, improvement is achieved not by concentrating on achieving theorganizational mission, but by looking to the shared vision of the organi-zation (Bernhardt, 2002). Concentrating on the vision, while conductingorganizational data analysis, exposes the gap between the organization’sshared vision and the weaknesses and strengths of the organization’ssystems intended to achieve the final outcome or mission (Bernhardt,2002).

168 B. FISCH

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

In effect, the Organizational Semiotic Model of Narrative Leadership(Figure 3) shows the importance of developing a shared vision. From this,the organization’s stakeholders develop strategies, objectives and goals toaddress the gap analysis. Bernhardt (2002) believed that performing a gapanalysis allows the stakeholders to find the root causes of the problems.They can then fashion a plan to deal with these, in order to reach theintended outcomes derived from the shared vision.

Narrative leadership helps direct the focus of the organization’s stake-holders to the shared vision. Leadership that focuses on improvementthrough the shared vision of the organization will incidentally cause theorganization to produce results and be effective. If the leadership focusbecomes data-driven, then meaningful change is forsaken for managerialcontrol. In this case, accomplishing the organizational mission andpurpose eludes the organization. This failure can be rationalized bymanagement through manipulation of the prevailing quantitative data andby responding to this failure with punitive action and even more control.

Autonomy and narrative leadership

Wheatley (1994) contended that leadership maintains focus, not control,and creates organizational flexibility and responsiveness. Czarniawska-Joerges (1988) referred to this as autonomy——a neglected aspect ofcontrol that ought to be reclaimed. Wheatley (2005, p. 28) reminded usthat ‘all of life resists control ... [and] reacts to any process that inhibitsthe freedom to create itself ’.

Hatch (1997) suggested that organizations that are focused rather thancontrolled undertake vision management. She believed that when thisoccurs, organizations become ideological. Membership in ideological orga-nizations involves a sense of identification (Czarniawska-Joerges, 1988;Hatch, 1997). Hatch noted that identification is when loyal followers areoriented towards their leader. Members are involved with the ideologicalorganization because they derive personal satisfaction from belief in itspurpose (Hatch, 1997). In effect, this amounts to members taking theorganization and its leadership into their quality world (Glasser, 1998).

In a quality organization, narrative leadership shakes the very founda-tions of traditional management and modifies the hegemonic controlstructures of traditional hierarchies (Hatch, 1997). Generally, controlrelies on the communication aspect of statistical feedback systems. Thiscontrasts with using narrative for assuring organizational quality. A storyis the contemporary means of communication for exchanging information,constructing knowledge and representing self-organizing systems. Hatchbelieved that, in its holism, it captures the gestalt of quality organizationsthrough the arts, rather than the sciences, employing ‘linguistics and liter-ary theory for insights into the more symbolic aspects of social as opposedto physical systems’ (p. 371).

Storytelling melds leadership focus with management control, synthe-sizing them into ideological control (Czarniawska-Joerges, 1988). It seeksto disrupt the hegemony of control built into modern bureaucracies.

NARRATIVE LEADERSHIP 169

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Narrative leadership reflects the concept of ideological control. Ideologicalcontrol simultaneously fosters both autonomy and control (Czarniawska-Joerges, 1988; Hatch, 1997). Narrative leadership paradoxically facilitateschange through this seeming contradiction, one that is found in qualityorganizations.

Or, as a committee coordinator from this study said:

I think … with this school portfolio … it’s not that they [administration] handed me this docu-

ment and said you will believe this and you will achieve these goals in this amount of time.

They didn’t do that, we did. That makes us change our perception of the administration …

when it comes to our goals and our story, they didn’t dictate it to us. It is not them telling us

what we are or what we are going to be. We said it. It came out of us.

Through this study, I came to find how developing autonomy in the stake-holders of a quality organization is at the core of narrative leadership.

Practicing narrative leadership

Those leading quality educational organizations ought to practice narra-tive leadership, or else the institution’s constituencies will write theschool’s story for them through dialogue with other educators, politiciansand the external public in general. Their story, then, will ultimately findits expression through various mass media. Storytelling efforts by theseconstituencies will be based solely on their perceptions of whateverphenomenon or issue is of concern to them.

Glasser (1998) believed that the current and prevailing school narra-tive reflects a mechanistic worldview that students, like things, do nothave needs and that teachers should fill these student-things with frag-ments of measurable knowledge. Measuring how many fragments of infor-mation student-things retain on standardized achievement tests is how wecurrently define education (Glasser, 1998). This reflects an outdatedunderstanding of complex social systems such as schools. Competentteachers do not consider this to be worthwhile education. Glasser con-cluded that the politically motivated fragment measurers and standardiz-ers who currently control our educational systems either depreciate orignore these teachers’ input. Power is about other institutions or peopleconcocting narratives for us (Czarniawska, 1997). They make for us ouridentities, without including us in the conversation. Czarniawska believedthat, even so, we are also co-authors of history. Thus, narrative leadershipis needed now more than ever to co-author educational history by tellingthe rest of the story about quality in schools.

This administrator understands how important it is to communicateabout school quality to internal stakeholders and to the external public bypracticing narrative leadership:

It’s important as public school people to continue to let the public know what we are doing,

and what we are about, and this is one more vehicle or tool to do that. It’s a very valuable

one, a very valid one because we can show through our story … what we are doing, not just

say we are doing. … It is important for us to communicate, to everyone who will listen, what is

going on.

170 B. FISCH

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Conclusion

The Organizational Semiotic Model of Narrative Leadership (Figure 3)shows how narrative leadership can improve organizational qualitythrough meaning-making. This organizational semiotic model depictedhow natural language elicits meaning in people in leadership positions,thereby representing how an organizational story constructed narrativeleadership. Accordingly, storytelling enabled leaders to socially construct aquality organization by eliciting meaning in organizational stakeholders.Narrative leadership influences the reciprocal storytelling processes thatenables stakeholders to construct a meaningful mutual purpose of organi-zational transformation through continuous quality improvement.

Meaning, in quality school improvement or educational change, ismore meaningful than we thought (Fullan, 2001). There is reciprocitybetween social (shared) and personal meaning: each contributes to theother, and when one is absent, both are weakened (Fullan, 2001). Thekey to the success of the whole system is to change and is for people tosee themselves as stakeholders pursuing meaning, no matter how elusive(Fullan, 2001). Narrative leadership fosters reciprocity between personaland social meaning through storytelling in order to develop influentialinterpersonal relationships.

Our innermost needs are satisfied through relationships. Helpingpeople organize their work as a relational system will heal the personaland social ills prevalent in today’s workplace. One antidote to organiza-tional fragmentation is meaningful relationships fostered through narrativeleadership. The Conceptual Age requires vital leadership models that arerelevant and are capable of facilitating the improvement of quality in orga-nizations through meaning-making.

Acknowledgements

I am thankful to Dr Kathaleen Reid-Martinez for providing direction inthis article, sharing her insights, and, most of all, being a narrative leader.I want to also thank the editor and reviewers for their suggestions.

References

AdvancED. (2008). School accreditation overview. Retrieved June 5, 2008, from http://www.advanc-ed.

org

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational

leadership. In G. E. Hickman (Ed.), Leading organizations (pp. 135–140). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Bernhardt, V. L. (1999). The school portfolio: A comprehensive framework for school improvement (2nd

ed.). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

Bernhardt, V. L. (2002). The school portfolio toolkit: A planning, implementation, and evaluation guide for

continuous school improvement. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

Bernhardt, V. L., von Blanckensee, L., Lauck, M., Rebello, F., Bonilla, G., & Tribbey, M. (2000).

The example school portfolio, a companion to the school portfolio: A comprehensive framework for

school improvement. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

NARRATIVE LEADERSHIP 171

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Boulding, K. E. (1956). General systems theory——The skeleton of science. Management Science, 2,

197–208.

Boyce, M. (1995). Collective centering and collective sense-making in the stories and storytelling of

one organization. Organization Studies, 16, 107–138.

Campbell, D. T. (1976). Assessing the impact of planned social change. Occasional paper series, paper #8.

Kalamazoo, MI: Evaluation Center, Western Michigan University.

Collins, J., & Porras, J. (1997). Organizational vision and visionary organizations. In G. E. Hickman

(Ed.), Leading organizations (pp. 234–249). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Czarniawska, B. (1997). Narrating the organization. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Czarniawska-Joerges, B. (1988). Ideological control in nonideological organizations. New York, NY:

Praeger.

Deming, W. E. (1986). Out of the crisis. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center

for Advanced Engineering Study.

Fisch, B. (2010). Evaluating organizational quality through narrative: A case for accreditation using

the school portfolio. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 13, 455–487.

Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College

Press.

Gazendam, H. W. M., Jorna, R. J., & Cijsouw, R. S. (2003). Introduction. In H. W. M. Gazendam,

R. J. Jorna, & R. S. Cijsouw (Eds.), Dynamics and change in organizations: Studies in organiza-

tional semiotics (pp. 1–12). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.

Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Glasser, W. (1998). The quality school (revised ed.). New York, NY: HarperPerennial.

Goodhart, C. A. E. (1984). Monetary theory and practice: The UK experience. London: Macmillan Press.

Hatch, M. J. (1997). Organization theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. New York,

NY: Oxford University Press.

Hickman, G. E. (1998). The impetus for organizational leadership: Vision, mission, and goals. In G.

E. Hickman (Ed.), Leading organizations (pp. 227–229). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Johnson, H. T., & Broms, A. (2000). Profit beyond measure: Extraordinary results through attention to

work and people. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Keel, T. (2007). Intuitive leadership: Embracing a paradigm of narrative, metaphor & chaos. Grand Rap-

ids, MI: Baker Books.

Lambert, L., Walker, D., Zimmerman, D. P., Cooper, J. E., Lambert, M. D., Gardner, M. D., &

Ford Slack, P. J. (1995). The constructivist leader. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Littlejohn, S. W. (1983). Theories of human communication (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub-

lishing Company.

Manz, C., & Sims, H. (1991). Superleadership: Beyond the myth of heroic leadership. Organizational

Dynamics, 20(Spring), 1–18.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

Musson, G., & Cohen, L. (1999). Understanding language processes: A neglected skill in the man-

agement curriculum. Management Learning, 30, 27–42.

Ogden, C. K., & Richards, I. A. (1989). The meaning of meaning. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace

Jovanovich. (Original work published 1923)

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation & research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Peters, T. (1987). Thriving on chaos: A handbook for a management revolution. New York, NY:

HarperPerrenial.

Pink, D. (2006). A whole new mind: Why right–brainers will rule the future (revised ed.). New York,

NY: Penguin Group.

Polkinghorne, D. (1988). Narrative knowing and the human sciences. Albany, NY: State University of

New York Press.

Polkinghorne, D. (1995). Narrative configuration as qualitative analysis. In J. Hatch & R. Wisniewski

(Eds.), Life history and narrative (pp. 5–25). London: Falmer Press.

Rauch, C. F., & Behling, O. (1984). Functionalism: Basis for an alternative approach to the study of

leadership. In J. Hunt, D. Hosking, C. Schriesheim, & R. Steward (Eds.), Leaders and manag-

ers: International perspectives on managerial behavior and leadership (pp. 45–62). New York, NY:

Pergamon.

Rost, J. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. In G. E. Hickman (Ed.), Leading organizations

(pp. 97–114). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

172 B. FISCH

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14

Senge, P. (2000). Foreword. In H. T. Johnson & A. Broms (Eds.), Profit beyond measure: Extraordi-

nary results through attention to work and people (pp. xiii–xiv). New York, NY: The Free Press.

Tienken, C. H. (2011). Pay for performance: Whose performance? Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47, 152–154.

Veith, G. E. (1994). Postmodern times. Wheaton, IL: Good News.

Wheatley, M. (1994). Leadership and the new science: Learning about organization from an orderly uni-

verse. In G. E. Hickman (Ed.), Leading organizations (pp. 158–165). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wheatley, M. (2005). Finding our way: Leadership for an uncertain time. San Francisco, CA: Berrett

Koehler.

NARRATIVE LEADERSHIP 173

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

irm

ingh

am]

at 2

0:28

12

Nov

embe

r 20

14