21st century has witnessed global changes in economic, social and technological field.  Growth in qualified man power has led to practice of different leadership styles. Practising different leadership style is the need of the hour. It enables the managers to get their work done from their team effortlessly and effectively. Ancient leadership models were largely dependant on enforcement, competition and hierarchy. Instead of motivating individuals, it affects negatively the enthusiasm and performances of individuals working with such leaders. As a result of the rapid change, using various effective leadership  styles became  the need of the hour. Management changed its meaning and the responsibilities of managers increased. From now onwards, managers are not individuals who run towards target but they are the ones who analyse the qualities and abilities of their team and motivate them to achieve their target by effective communication and collaboration, along with the leaders involved in the process. Leadership skill is not enough for success in education. Education is a product that emerges with sharing responsibilities of different people from different units taking place in education process. Currently, the existing classical and central approaches related to educational organization started to lose their popularity, and strong single leader concept gave its place to more democratic, more sharing approaches like distributive leadership. It is clear that if people from each stage of educational product share the educational process, and principals distribute the power, it will affect the motivation of the employees.

Distributing the power is a very hot issue in educational administration literature at present. The view of distributive leadership in which the power of leadership is shared widely both in and out of the organizations emerges different leadership types. In this type of leadership, the interactions between the formal and informal leaders are more important than their actions. The distributive perspective of leadership regards all individuals to participate in leadership applications although, they are not formal ones. It contributes not only the structural development of the organizations but also the motivation of the individuals positively. (Harris and Spillane, 2008). indicated that achievement of individual in the organization is the result of their talents and their will to work. If the capabilities are at high-level and there is no desire to work, success is null. For this reason, the first thing to be done after recruiting individual into the organization is to encourage him to work effectively. Motivation to work effectively is related to the employees involvement in the organization and his will to be in the organization. It can be said that an employee is pleased with the organization if he experiences job satisfaction.  Job satisfaction is not same for every individual. This is related to the necessities of individuals and motivation factors leading to work. For some, a good payment is enough for satisfaction, whereas, for others a unique accomplishment in their role may lead to a higher job satisfaction (Adapted from BoÄŸa, 2010). Job satisfaction is the positive feeling or pleasure an employee gets as a result of his life judgement. It is an employee’s feeling when he finds the probable expected values from the organization and the ones he needs equivalent (cited by BaÅŸaran, 2004: 381).

In previous studies related to the issue, it was found that although, the job satisfaction of the individuals changed according to such variables as gender, age, field of profession and seniority, there was a positive meaningful correlation between the the leadership style applied and the job satisfaction of the individuals (Yıldırım, 2001; AkdoÄŸan, 2002; BaÅŸaran, 2006; Güllü, 2009; BoÄŸa, 2010; Öztürk, 2012; Hamilton, 2007; Johnson, 2007; Mota, 2010, Ä°smail, 2012). However, after searching the national and international studies, it is seen that there are a few ones on the distributive leadership. As this study is mainly focused on the applied leadership types on the job satisfaction of the instructors, it is claimed that this study will be a great source on the distributive leadership in Turkey and lead and guide to the new studies. In the light of information above, the purpose  of   the   study  was  to  determine  the  effect  of principals’ distributive leadership behaviours and its dimensions on the instructors’ job satisfaction and its dimensions. For this purpose, three five research questions were developed:

1. What is the effect of distributive leadership behaviours of principals on the job satisfaction of instructors?

2. What is the effect of distributive leadership behaviours of principals on the intrinsic job satisfaction of instructors?

3. What are the instructors’ perceptions on “modelling”, “inspiring the shared vision”, “challenging the process”, enabling others to act” and “encouraging the heart” to affect their intrinsic motivation?

4. What is the effect of distributive leadership behaviours of principals on the extrinsic job satisfaction of instructors?

5. What are the instructors’ perceptions on “modelling”, “inspiring the shared vision”, “challenging the process”, enabling others to act” and “encouraging the heart” to affect their extrinsic motivation?

Sample

This study was conducted on 4210 instructors working in 62 schools of foreign languages existing in 103 state universities in Turkey during the academic year 2013 to 2014. The study sample was composed of 416 instructors elected randomly through “Simple Random Sampling” technique among 4210 instructors existing in the field. In simple random sampling, the number of elements entering sample from each different elements of the field is determined completely by chance (Karasar, 2005: 113). The demographical features of the sample are given in Table 1.

Instruments

In the study, the adaptation of “Leadership practice inventory” which was developed by Kouzes and Posner (2002) and formulated the final version in 2003 and “Minnesota job Satisfaction Questionnaire- short form” developed by R.W.Davis, D.J. Weiss, G.W. England, L.H.Lofquist(1967) were administered to the subjects. The adaptation of two tools were put in a single form including 49 questions. On the first page, introductive information including information about questionnaires and demographic questions related with principals and instructors was highlighted.

Leadership practices inventory

The permission for the adaptation of the inventory has been obtained from Verity Butler (Permissions Co-ordinator) in Wiley and Sons Ltd. The inventory has been translated from English to Turkish by four qualified translation experts. These translations have been compared and then compiled on a form by other expert. This form has been translated from Turkish to English by an expert who has never seen it before. After  necessary  changes applied by comparing the Turkish and English versions of the tool, it has been revised by an expert on Educational Administration whether there has been a meaningful change in statements and rough inventory has been prepared to administrate. After adaptation, Leadership Practices Inventory uses a Likert-type scale (based on the responses: (1) almost  never, (2) rarely (3) sometimes (4) frequently and (5) always). The specialists around the field gave their opinions about the content validity and it is concluded that the instrument can measure the distributive leadership applications.  According to Kouzes and Postner (2002), there are five dimensions of Leadership practices inventory:

1. Modelling the way: Leaders establish principles concerning the way people (constituents, peers, colleagues, and customers alike) should be treated and the way goals should be pursued. They create standards of excellence and then set an example for others to follow.

2. Inspring the shared vision: Leaders passionately believe that they can make a difference. They envision the future, creating an ideal and unique image of what the organization can become.

3. Challenging the process: Leaders search for opportunities to change the status quo. They look for innovative ways to improve the organization. In doing so, they experiment and take risks.

4. Enabling others to act : Leaders understand that mutual respect is what sustains extraordinary efforts; they strive to create an atmosphere of trust and human dignity.

5. Encouraging the heart: To keep hope and determination alive, leaders recognize contributions that individuals make. In every winning team, the members need to share in the rewards of their efforts, so leaders celebrate accomplishments.

For the construct validity The Pearson Corelation method is used to anlyze whether each item in the instrument has the highest grade  in the dimensions they belong to. Table 2 shows the dimension where the items of LPI got the highest point in Pearson Correlation Analysis. According to the findings, it is clear that the items of each dimension in the adopted form of the inventory are paralell to those in the original inventory except for item 2. Although, item 2 takes place “inspring the shared vision” dimension in the original form, it takes place under the dimension of “encouraging the heart” in the adopted form. Therefore, item 2 was omitted, Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for the whole scale was 0.980.

Minnesota job satisfaction questionnaire

The permission for the adaptation of the questionnaire has been granted from Dr. David Weiss, the director of  Vocation  Psychology Research. 20 item short form of Minnesota Job Satisfaction Questionnaire was developed by R.W. Davis, D.J. Weiss, G.W. England, L.H. Lofquist in 1967 integrating statements related with predictions consisting of questionannaire’s long form’s intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction elements. The adaptation of Minnesota Job Satisfaction Questionnaire uses a Likert-type scale graded 1 to 5. (based on the responses: (1) very dissatisfied (2) dissatisfied (3) neutral (4) satisfied (5) very satisfied). The specialists around the field gave their opinions about the content validity and it is concluded that the instrument can measure the distributive leadership applications. As seen in Table 3, for the construct validity The Pearson Corelation method is used to anlyze whether each item in the instrument has the highest grade in the dimensions they belong to. Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient for the whole scale was 0.872.

Data analysis

The statistical package programme was utilised for the analysis and interpretation of the data which were obtained through the implementation of the scales. The linear regression was used in order to analyze the effect of distributive leadership behaviours of the principals on the job satisfaction of the instructors. The significance level was taken as 0.05 in all comparisons.

The first problem of this study has been determined as “What is the effect of distributive leadership behaviours of principals on job satisfaction of instructors?” In order to answer this problem, the effect of principal’s distributive leadership behaviours on instructors’ job satisfaction has been compared through linear regression analysis. Distributive leadership behaviours are taken as independent; the job satisfaction of the instructors is taken as  dependent  variable.  According to the results of linear regression analysis, it is tried to reveal how much of job satisfaction of instructors (by stabilizing the other factors affecting the academic performance) is affected by principals distributive leadership behaviours. In this sense, it is tried to reveal how much of this effect can be predicted by principals distributive leadership behaviours although, there are several factors affecting instructors job satisfaction. According to the findings obtained, the prediction power of distributive leadership behaviours of the principals for job satisfaction level has been determined. The findings are given in table 4. As seen in table 4, according to the results of regression analysis in which distributive leadership behaviours are used as independent, job satisfaction  as dependent variable, the level of the explanation of the dependent variable is statistically  meaningful  (R = 0.60,  R2 = 0.36,  P < 0.05). Namely, it can be said that the principals distributive leadership behaviours have an effect at a significant level on instructors job satisfaction and these behaviours are one of the predictors of job satisfaction. As to these findings, it is expected that the more the principals show distributive leadership behaviours, the more satisfied the instructors will be in their jobs.

The second problem of this study has been determined as “What is the effect of distributive leadership behaviours of principals on the intrinsic job satisfaction of instructors? In order to answer this problem, the effect of principal’s distributive leadership behaviours on instructors’ inner job satisfaction has been compared through linear regression analysis. Distributive leadership behaviours are taken as independent; the intrinsic job satisfaction of the instructors is taken as dependent  variable.  According  to the results of linear regression analysis, it is tried to reveal how much of intrinsic job satisfaction of instructors (by stabilizing the other factors affecting the academic performance) is affected by principals distributive leadership behaviours. In this sense, it is tried to reveal how much of this effect can be predicted by principals distributive leadership behaviours although, there are several factors affecting instructors inner job satisfaction. According to the findings obtained, the prediction power of distributive leadership behaviours of the principals for intrinsic job satisfaction level has been determined. The findings are given in table 5. As seen in table 5, according to the results of regression analysis in which distributive leadership behaviours are used as independent, intrinsic job satisfaction as dependent variable, the level of the explanation of the dependent variable is statistically meaningful (R=0.43, R2 =0.18, p<0.05). According to the above analysis it is clear that distributive leadership behaviours for intrinsic job satisfaction is 18%. Namely, it can be said that the principals distributive leadership behaviours have an effect at a significant level on instructors intrinsic job satisfaction and these behaviours are one of the predictors of job satisfaction. As to these findings, it is expected that the more the principals show distributive leadership behaviours, the more satisfied the instructors will be in their jobs.

The third problem of this study has been determined as “What are the instructors’ perceptions on “modelling”, “inspiring the shared vision”, “challenging the process”, “enabling  others  to  act”  and  “encouraging the heart” affect their intrinsic motivation? In order to answer this problem, the effect of principal’s distributive leadership behaviours with its dimensions on instructors’ inner job satisfaction has been compared through linear regression analysis. Distributive leadership behavior dimensions are taken as independent; the intrinsic job satisfaction of the instructors is taken as dependent variable. According to the results of linear regression analysis, it is tried to reveal how much of intrinsic job satisfaction of instructors (by stabilizing the other factors affecting the academic performance) is affected by the dimensions of distributive leadership behaviours. According to the findings gathered, the prediction power of the behaviours taking place in distributive leadership dimensions on intrinsic job satisfaction level has been determined. The findings are given in table 6.

As seen in table 6, the analysis explains the model related to intrinsic job satisfaction at the rate of 22% (R2=0.22). As the p value is smaller than 0.05, it can be said that the findings are statistically meaningful. When the p value of “enabling others to act” has been examined, it can be concluded that the behaviours under this dimension have meaningful effects on the inner job satisfaction of the instructors.

However, it is clear that “modelling the way”, ”inspiring the shared vision”, “challenging the process” and “encouraging the heart” do not have significant effects on the intrinsic job satisfaction of the lecturers (p>0.05). The fourth problem of this study has been determined as “What is the effect of distributive leadership behaviours of principals on the extrinsic job satisfaction of instructors? In order to answer this problem,  the  effect  of  principal’s distributive leadership behaviours on instructors outer job satisfaction has been compared through linear regression analysis. Distributive leadership behaviours are taken as independent; the extrinsic job satisfaction of the instructors is taken as dependent variable. According to the results of linear regression analysis, it is tried to reveal how much of extrinsic job satisfaction of instructors (by stabilizing the other factors affecting the academic performance) is affected by principals distributive leadership behaviours. In this sense, it is tried to reveal how much of this effect can be predicted by principals distributive leadership behaviours although, there are several factors affecting instructors outer job satisfaction. The findings are shown in table 7. As seen in table 7, according to the results of regression analysis in which distributive leadership behaviours are used as independent, extrinsic job satisfaction  as dependent variable, the level of the explanation of the dependent variable is statistically meaningful (R=0.70, R2 =0.49, p<0.05). According to the analysis above, it is clear that distributive leadership behaviours for extrinsic job satisfaction is 49%. Namely, it can be said that the principals distributive leadership behaviours have an effect at a significant level on instructors outer job satisfaction and these behaviours are one of the predictors of extrinsic job satisfaction. As to these findings, it is obvious that if principals behave instructors in a distribute way, the instructors will be extrinsicly motivated. 

The final problem of this study has been determined as “What are the instructors’ perceptions on “modelling”, “inspiring  the  shared  vision”,  “challenging the process”, “enabling others to act” and “encouraging the heart” affect their extrinsic motivation?  In order to answer this problem, linear regression analysis has been used to determine the effect of principal’s distributive leadership behaviours with its dimensions on instructors’ extrinsic job satisfaction. Distributive leadership behavior dimensions are taken as independent; the extrinsic job satisfaction of the instructors is taken as dependent variable. According to the findings gathered, the prediction power of the behaviours taking place in distributive leadership dimensions on extrinsic job satisfaction level has been determined. The findings are given in table 8. As seen in table 8, the analysis explains the model related to extrinsic job satisfaction at the rate of 55% (R2=0.55). As the p value is smaller than 0.05, it can be said that the findings are statistically meaningful. When the p value of “enabling others to act” and “encouraging the heart” have been examined, it can be concluded that the behaviours under these dimensions statistically affect on the extrinsic job satisfaction of the instructors. On the other hand, it can be said that “modelling the way”,”inspiring the shared vision”, and  “challenging the process” do not contribute significantly to the extrinsic job satisfaction of the lecturers (p>0.05). When the factors of these two dimensions are compared, it can be concluded that “enabling others to act” dimension is much more effective in terms of the extrinsic job satisfaction of the instructors than “encouraging the heart” dimension.

This study has tried to determine the impact of distributive leadership behaviours of foreign language school’s principals on instructors job satisfaction. Data analysis shows that foreign language school principals distributive leadership behaviours have a positive effect on instructors job satisfaction. From this result, it can be determined that the increase in the frequency of distributive leadership behaviours of foreign language school principals may also increase the job satisfaction level of instructors. From the findings on job satisfaction analysis, it can be said that foreign language school pricipals’ distributive leadership behaviours contribute meaningfully on instructors’ job satisfaction. Namely, it can be concluded that principals display distributive leadership behaviours; being model for instructors, giving opportunities, encouraging, guiding them to overcome difficulties and affecting them positively are the factors increasing instructors job satisfaction. Moreover, the distributive style of behaviours increase the intrinsic job satisfaction of the instructors. Thus, these behaviours give the instructors opportunities for self decisions related their tasks. They like their positions at schools and not having fear of losing these positions. These positive feelings directly affect their job satisfaction. Likewise, such behaviours as having good relations with the principals and among the colleagues, enjoying the leadership philosophy applied in the schools are also good indicators of extrinsic job satisfaction.                               

On the basis of dimensions, it can be said that principals’ behaviours under the heading of “enabling others to act” boost not only the intrinsic but also the extrinsic job satisfaction of the lecturers. According to findings it can be concluded that if principals treat instructors as individuals not workers, give them chances to participate instutitional decision process, show them respect in and out of the school, provide opportunities for both individual and professional development through sending them in-service courses or national-international seminars, and reward them when necessary they will be much more satisfied. In spite of the fact that studies put emphasis on the positive contributions of distributive leadership for organizational development, it is clear that applications of this leadership manner will reveal inevitable difficulties. Individuals should not ignore that constructional, cultural and micro-politic obstacles, exists in schools. It may prevent adoption of distributive leadership style. The first problem that emerge as a result of applications of distributive leadership is the concern of formal leaders as the distributive leadership requires individuals on official leadership position to transfer the power to others. This situation will leave formal leaders vulnerable as this application will take power of control from their hands.

In addition to that, this situation will also put schools into trouble economically and lead executives in formal leadership position to look for other methods in order to prompt the individuals in informal leadership position. Besides, ‘top to bottom’ management method and internal structure of school is an obstacle or the adoption of distributive leadership applications. The understanding of gathering existing power at the present time on top, intramural, rural and academical formations, distinction of individual or department and differences of seniority are triggering factors for teachers to obtain autonomy and undertake leadership role. Lastly, the most significant issue that prevent application of distributive leadership manner at schools is the issue of ‘how’ and ‘by whom’ are the responsibility and authority will be distributed. (Harris, 2004: 20). Consequently, in changing and developing educational institutions which adopted distributive leadership manner, not only a leader and just his efforts about education, but also, other stakeholders’ facilities and interactions together with the leaders appear.  Within the organization, individuals support the emerging developments to be more productive and increase interaction. This situation provides the organization to be more active and more effective by emerging various leaderships in various situations (Yılmaz, 2013: 38). At the end of these positive impacts, it is inevitable that many principals obtain distributive leadership manner and the concept will be widespread.

Adaptation to the rapid change and transformation due to globalisation enforce the educational organizations along with the other fields. In this century, the educational organizations  are   getting   more   complicated  so   new leadership styles which will respond different demands of instructors and contribute to their job satisfaction are needed. In order to cope with this radical change, it is thought that it will provide a great advantage for educational managers and leaders to be able to look through the perspective of distributive leadership. In this sense, this study is regarded as useful and important to determine, analyze and evaluate the principals’ distributive leadership behaviour levels, and the effect of these applications on the job satisfaction of instructors working in the same institution. Simultaneously, it is thought that the findings will have a great contribution to the admistrative staff and the occupational development of the managers. In this study, the findings show that the principals distributive leadership behaviours have an effect at a significant level on instructors’ job satisfaction but it is found as “sometimes” level. In the light of this result, it can be said that the common style of burocratic structure of leadership in Turkey should be restructered as distributive style so that teachers get more satisfied with their jobs. It is clear from the findings that the job satisfaction related items mostly take place in “enabling others to act” dimension of distributive leadership. Therefore, the school principals provide the individuals opportunities to show their knowledge and skills. Praising them will also increase their motivation and job satisfaction.

Also, both the national and the international sample applications of distributive leadership should be intro-duced to very first principals, then the other stakeholders. In order to apply distributive leadership style in schools The Ministry of Education or Higher Education Council should hold some congresses or in-service seminars and raise awareness on the new concept. Moreover, the frame of distributive leadership and the definition of stakeholders’ responsibilites should be drawn carefully so that it does not lead to any chaos.

The author has not declared any conflict of interest.