The Effect of Leadership Antecedents on School Leaders’ Decision-Making: The Mediating Role of Strategic Thinking
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt20251806Keywords:
educational leadership, self-efficacy, ambidextrous leadership, strategic thinking, decision- making, leadership developmentAbstract
Introduction: Educational leadership today faces mounting complexity, requiring school leaders to make rapid yet well-reasoned decisions that influence institutional success. Existing leadership development programmes, such as the National Professional Qualification for Educational Leadership (NPQEL), emphasise strategic thinking and performance; however, the specific psychological and behavioural traits that underpin decision-making remain underexplored. This study aims to investigate how self-efficacy (a psychological trait) and ambidextrous leadership (a behavioural trait) influence school leaders’ decision-making, with strategic thinking examined as a mediating cognitive process. Grounded in Social Cognitive Theory and Trait Theory, the research addresses a key gap in understanding how internal beliefs and adaptive leadership behaviours translate into decision-making competence through strategic cognition.
Methods: A quantitative research design was employed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM). The sample comprised 275 school leaders across Malaysia who completed the NPQEL programme between 2018 and 2020. Data were analysed to test both direct effects and mediating pathways within a hypothesised structural model.
Results: The findings indicate that both self-efficacy and ambidextrous leadership significantly predict decision-making capability. Importantly, strategic thinking was found to partially mediate these relationships, suggesting that school leaders with greater emotional and behavioural adaptability leverage strategic cognition to make more effective decisions. These results reinforce the necessity for leadership programmes to move beyond technical training by incorporating strategies that foster psychological resilience and strategic cognitive development.
Conclusion: The study contributes to the theoretical advancement of educational leadership by integrating emotional, behavioural, and cognitive dimensions into a unified model of decision-making. Practically, it offers evidence-based insights for policymakers and educational institutions to enhance leadership preparation for complexity, ambiguity, and outcome-driven environments.
References
1. Ahsan, Z. (2019). Impact of Ambidextrous Leadership on Project Success with the Mediating Role of Innovation and Moderating Role of Self-Efficacy. Capital University of Science and Technology Islamabad.
2. Al-Qatamin, A. A., & Esam, A. M. (2018). Effect of Strategic Thinking Skills on Dimensions of Competitive Advantage: Empirical Evidence from Jordan. International Journal of Business and Management, 13(5), 127. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v13n5p127
3. Alatailat, M. H. E., Elrehail, H., & Emeagwali, O. L. (2019). High performance work practices , organizational performance and strategic thinking. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 27(3), 370–395. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-10-2017-1260
4. Arabacı, B. (2018). Relationship Between School Principals’ Perceptions of Self-Efficacy and Their Administration Styles. The Journal of Academic Social Science Studies, 70(December), 93–102.
5. Bajcar, B., Babiak, J., & Nosal, C. S. (2015). When Leaders Become Strategists. A New Look at Determinants of Leadership Styles through their Relationship with Strategic Thinking. Procedia Manufacturing, 3(Ahfe), 3669–3676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.777
6. Baroudi, S., & Hojeij, Z. (2020). The role of self-efficacy as an attribute of principals’ leadership effectiveness in K-12 private and public institutions in Lebanon. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 23(4), 457–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2018.1529822
7. Carlman, I., Grönlund, E., & Longueville, A. (2015). Models and methods as support for sustainable decision-making with focus on legal operationalisation. Ecological Modelling, 306, 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2014.10.010
8. Chin, W. W. (1998). Issues and Opinion on Structural Equation Modeling. MIS Quarterly, 22(1), vii-xvi CR-Copyright © 1998 Management Inf. http://www.jstor.org/stable/249674
9. Federici, R. A., & Skaalvik, E. M. (2012). Principal self-efficacy: Relations with burnout, job satisfaction and motivation to quit. Social Psychology of Education, 15(3), 295–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-012-9183-5
10. Fisher, Y. (2020). Self-efficacy of School Principals. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education (Issue July). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.910 Hunitie, M. (2018). Impact of strategic leadership on strategic competitive advantage through strategic thinking and strategic planning: a bi-meditational research. Business: Theory and Practice. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2018.32
11. Kooi, T. T. (2019). The influence of CEO Ambidextrous Leadership on Firm Operational and Innovative Performance : Empirical Research on Chinese Enterprises. Fordham University New York.
12. Luo, B., Zheng, S., Ji, H., & Liang, L. (2018). Ambidextrous leadership and TMT-member ambidextrous behavior: the role of TMT behavioral integration and TMT risk propensity. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(2), 338–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1194871
13. Marshall, J., & Fisher, D. (2018). Making Preparation Practical : Reducing Aspiring Administrator Time to Competence Through Five Types of Leaderly Thinking. Journal of School Administration Research and Development, 3(1), 74–80.
14. Matar, H. M., & Samour, A. (2017). The Impact of Strategic Thinking on Decision Making Case study: UNRWA Gaza-Field Office [The Islamic University - Gaza]. In Iranian Journal of Management Studies (Vol. 7, Issue 2). https://www.mobt3ath.com/uplode/book/book-14525.pdf
15. McCormick, M. J., Tanguma, J., & López-Forment, A. S. (2002). Extending Self-Efficacy Theory to Leadership. Journal of Leadership Education, 1(2), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.12806/v1/i2/tf1
16. Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013 - 2025, 27 Education 1 (2013). http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0742051X10001435
17. Moon, B. J. (2012). Antecedents and outcomes of strategic thinking. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1698–1708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.11.006
18. Nadav, N., Benoliel, P., Shaked, H., & Schechter, C. (2020). Exploring School Principals’ Systems Thinking Activities. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 00(00), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2020.1734208
19. Özer, N. (2013). Investigation of the primary school principals’ sense of self-efficacy and professional burnout. Middle East Journal of Scientific Research, 15(5), 682–691. https://doi.org/10.5829/idosi.mejsr.2013.15.5.11108
20. Rasheed, R. (2018). Determinants of SMEs Owner-Manager Behavioral Intention Towards Usage of Financial Products [Universiti Utara Malaysia]. http://library1.nida.ac.th/termpaper6/sd/2554/19755.pdf
21. Rosing, K., Frese, M., & Bausch, A. (2011). Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership-innovation relationship: Ambidextrous leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 956–974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.014
22. Rosing, K., & Zacher, H. (2017). Individual ambidexterity: the duality of exploration and exploitation and its relationship with innovative performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(5), 694–709. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2016.1238358
23. Shaked, H., & Schechter, C. (2019). Exploring systems thinking in school principals‘ decision-making. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 22(5), 573–596. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2018.1481533
24. Shon, D. (2019). Conceptualizing and Testing the Model of Ambidextrous Leadership: Evidence from a Multi-Method Research Study [COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY]. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
25. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 1059–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.11.001 Steptoe-Warren, G., Howat, D., & Hume, I. (2011). Strategic thinking and decision making: literature review. Journal of Strategy and Management, 4(3), 238–250. https://doi.org/10.1108/17554251111152261
26. Vera, D., & Crossan, M. (2004). Theatrical improvisation: Lessons for organizations. Organization Studies, 25(5), 727–749. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840604042412
27. Yurtseven, M. K., & Buchanan, W. W. (2016). Decision Making And Systems Thinking: Educational Issues. American Journal of Engineering Education, 7(1), 19–28.
28. Zacher, H., Robinson, A. J., & Rosing, K. (2016). Ambidextrous Leadership and Employees’ Self- Reported Innovative Performance: The Role of Exploration and Exploitation Behaviors. Journal of Creative Behavior, 50(1), 24–46. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.66
29. Zacher, H., & Rosing, K. (2015). Ambidextrous leadership and team innovation. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 36(1), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-11-2012-0141.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Fakhrul Anwar Ishak , Darwina Ahmad Arshad , Nurul Sharniza Husin (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
