Teachers' Perceptions of Principals' Destructive Behaviors in Ontario: Forms, Impacts, and Mitigation

Abstract

Although the field of educational research has predominantly emphasized the positive aspects of educational leadership, the issue of destructive leadership (DL) remains a persistent challenge in school environments. The present study investigates the perceptions of teachers regarding destructive behaviors exhibited by school principals in publicly funded secondary schools in Ottawa, Ontario. The research focuses on identifying the forms of these behaviors, their impacts on the victims, and potential strategies to mitigate or disrupt their occurrence. By examining the negative dimensions of principal leadership behaviors and their impacts on affected teachers, this study seeks to raise awareness of harmful practices and promote the development of healthier organizational climates within educational institutions. It addresses the following three research questions: (1) What principal leadership behaviors are perceived by teachers as destructive in the schooling context in Ontario? (2) How have DL behaviors affected victimized teachers in their professional career and/or personal lives? (3) What do the victims perceive as strategies to prevent/disrupt the occurrence of DL in schooling context? To answer these questions, the research employs a mixed-methods approach, combining data from surveys and qualitative insights from in-depth interviews. Data collection involved 72 completed survey responses, which also served as a basis for selecting participants for six interviews. This approach allows a comprehensive examination of both DL prevalence and impacts in educational settings. The data analysis process unfolded in two phases. First, the quantitative survey data were analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) to identify patterns and trends in destructive leadership behaviors. Second, the qualitative interview data were analyzed using Braun and Clarke's (2006) six-phase thematic analysis process. This dual approach ensures a robust examination of the phenomenon, integrating statistical trends with rich, contextual narratives from participants' experiences. The survey findings revealed distinct patterns in the frequency of destructive leadership behaviors. These behaviors were categorized as frequent, moderately frequent, and least frequent yet concerning. Subtler behaviors, such as failing to defend subordinates and disregarding their feedback, emerged as the most prevalent manifestations of DL. DL behaviors which pose significant ethical concerns such as falsifying documents and misappropriating funds were equally less frequent. Qualitative findings from the interviews provided deeper insights into the forms and impacts of and ways to counter destructive leadership. Participants described a range of perceived destructive behaviors, including sexual harassment, negligence, favoritism, undermining subordinates' dignity, bias and discrimination, unfair criticism, financial impropriety, and abusive monitoring. These behaviors were linked to professional, financial, psychological and physiological effects on teachers. Victims reported experiencing stress, anxiety, frustration, and feelings of worthlessness. Specific accounts highlighted cases where teachers developed severe anxiety due to sudden authoritarian shifts in leadership styles, endured uncertainty from inconsistent feedback, or faced humiliation and isolation through unsupported accusations. The physiological repercussions included sleep disturbances, high blood pressure, and digestive issues, emphasizing the extensive toll of DL on individuals' overall health. Other effects include job relocation, resignation or absences. In exploring strategies to mitigate and prevent destructive leadership, participants emphasized the need for advocacy and support mechanisms. Their thoughts included the establishment of accessible and transparent reporting systems, along with institutional interventions to address destructive behaviors. Participants also highlighted the importance of fostering awareness about destructive leadership through professional development programs aimed at both leaders and subordinates. Additionally, victims shared personal coping strategies, including self-reflection, fostering positive relationships, and maintaining physical and emotional distance from destructive principals to minimize personal harm. By documenting and analyzing the destructive behaviors of school principals, this research contributes to a deeper understanding of leadership dynamics in schooling contexts. It highlights the urgency of addressing the negative dimensions of leadership to create supportive and nurturing environments for teachers. Moreover, the research underscores the importance of leveraging participants' perspectives to inform policy and practice aimed at combating destructive leadership.