An Analysis Of Peter Gronn s Article Distributed...

Conventionally, leadership had been long assumed to be thought of the following of a group or many a groups under a single leader, as described in Peter Gronn s article Distributed Leadership as a unit of analysis.† However, according to Gronn, this traditional form of thinking where one person or unit rules all (â€Å"leadership is basically doing what the leader wants done†) is faulty and ultimately leads to a counterproductive performance from the group as a whole, as everything falls upon one layer of responsibility. In addition, he identifies three major chinks in the solo-style leadership model’s armor: the almost-too simplistic dualism of the â€Å"leader-follower† set-up; the exact qualifications of what constitutes a leader and said leader’s leadership (which harkens back to the classic English idiom, â€Å"Who died and made you king?†); and anti-leadership, which as its name suggests, is the dismay of the idea of any form of necessar y leadership. Rather, what the article suggests is leaning towards the opposite end of the spectrum; a multilayered infrastructure of leadership and command - a â€Å"distributed leadership.† What is distributed leadership, exactly? Distributed Leadership for learning and teaching is a leadership approach in which collaborative working is undertaken between individuals who trust and respect each other’s contribution. It occurs as a result of an open culture within and across an institution. It is an approach in which reflective practice is an integralShow MoreRelatedDistributed Leadership For Learning And Teaching1362 Words   |  6 PagesTraditionally, leadership had been thought of as a single person that leads or directs a groups or many groups as described in Peter Gronn s article Distributed Leadership as a unit of analysis.† However, according to Gronn, this conventional form of thinking, where one person or unit rules all (â€Å"leadership is basically d oing what the leader wants done†) is faulty and ultimately leads to a counterproductive performance from the group as a whole, since everything falls upon one level of responsibility