Interrelationships within the four-frame leadership model in educational settings: a meta-analytical study

Muhammet İbrahim AKYÜREK, Ahmet Aypay, Figen Karaferye, Murat Özdemir

2025

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.1108/ijem-09-2024-0547
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Purpose This meta-analytical study aims to test the interrelationships within Bolman and Deal’s four-frame leadership model in educational settings around the world. Moreover, we evaluated the effect of several factors like publication year, study type, sample group, level of education and country of data collection on these relationships. Design/methodology/approach Data covered the articles and theses between 1994 and 2022, and the dataset consisted of 23 independent studies with an identical number of groups and a total sample of 5,835. The analyses proved that there was no publication bias. Fisher ɀ Coefficient was reported for the average effect size analyses in line with the random effects model. Findings We concluded that the average effect size of the relationships among all four frames was large. Subgroup analyses yielded significant differences by study type, sample group, level of education and country of data collection, but not by publication year. Research limitations/implications While the study sample comprises a well-known leadership model, it excludes some other popular leadership models (e.g. instructional leadership and transformational leadership) in the field. Nevertheless, research findings elaborate on the complex nature of school leadership. Originality/value The results indicate the intercorrelated nature of Bolman and Deal’s four-frame leadership model in support of the proposition for using multiple frameworks in combination. We also concluded that this effect is beyond cultural differences, antecedents and consequences.