IV. Conclusion

Companies such as SUIS need to be extra acute in who they eventually decide to hire for a school leader position. Even a “strong leader” who fits the profile flawlessly will come with some drawbacks. The type of individual able to lead a school to success is often engaging and forceful, willing to take orders during the initial period of induction, but eager for a less restrictive environment. Too little direction from the company may come at the expense of fidelity to the organization’s model. Too much direction will generate bitter conflicts of interest. The company must take consideration in how it will gradually prescribe power and how a mutual exchange of trust and respect will develop.

Training begins as a period of intense mentoring that gradually phases into less direct support. Although SUIS follows training as recommended by several theorists, its effects will not be revealed until after the new leader begins managing the school unsupervised. Few leaders are ready-made for success and it is the responsibility of the company to keep close checks and administer thorough and consciously designed evaluations at regular intervals. Problems must be identified early and accurately so that they can be dealt with to conclusion.

Aside from keeping leaders sharp, they must also be kept committed. Strong leaders mean nothing if they are not dedicated to the job. The school leadership position should have a sense of worth and purpose to it. SUIS must ensure that its design is made to be challenging and that a supportive network is available when tasks begin to overwhelm. The assurance that the company they work for is aware and understanding of their concerns allows school leaders to maintain dignity and a sense of respect for their employer.