Grassroots leaders: Reclaiming 'Native Leadership' as content for enhancing formal leadership preparation

It is almost a truism that persons who occupy formal bureaucratic positions in schools may not actually be leaders if they were not role incumbents in a bureaucracy. It is also clear from studies of grassroots leaders that without the qualities of skills of leadership no one would follow them because they have no formal, hierarchical role upon which others were dependent to them.\ud One of the reasons for re-examining the nature of grassroots leaders is to attempt to recapture those tactics or strategies which might be reconceptualized and utilized within more formal settings so that role dependent leadership becomes more effectual and trustworthy than one that is totally dependent on role authority. This reasoning is especially a critical need if there is a desire to work towards more democratic and collaborative working arrangements between leaders and followers, and where more flexible and dynamic relationships promise higher levels of commitment and productivity. Hecksher (1994) speaks of such a reconceptualization as part of a shift from an emphasis on power to one centered on influence.\ud This paper examines the nature of leadership before it was subjected to positivistic science and later behavioural studies. This move follows the advice of Heilbrunn (1996) who trenchantly observed that for leadership studies to grow as a discipline, “it will have to cast a wider net” (p.11). Willis et. Al. (2008) make a similar point when they lament that social scientist have forced favoured understanding bureaucracies rather than grassroots community organizations, yet much can be gained by being aware of the tactics and strategies used by grassroots leaders who depend on influence as opposed to power. This paper, then, aims to do this by posing a tentative model of grassroots leadership and then considering how this model might inform and be used by those responsible for developing school leaders