In the late 1970s and 1980s, principals were perceived as effective if they took charge of a school by setting clear expectations, maintaining firm discipline, and implementing high standards. This view of leadership was implicitly hierarchical, dependent on administrators firmly exercising their authority to direct subordinates. Because schools are not easily changed by simple prescriptions, researchers began searching for more sophisticated conceptions of leadership. Influenced by developments in the corporate sector, they have increasingly focused their attention on "transformational" or "facilitative" models of leadership that emphasize collaboration and empowerment.

Initially, the term transformational leadership was viewed as a personal quality, an ability to inspire employees to look beyond self–interest and focus on organizational goals. The concept has evolved over time; now it is often viewed as a broad strategy that has been described as "facilitative." The facilitative leader's role is to foster the involvement of employees at all levels. Several key strategies are used by facilitative leaders: overcoming resource constraints; building teams; providing feedback, coordination, and conflict management; creating communication networks; practicing collaborative politics; and modeling the school's vision.

Traditionally, power has been viewed as domination through formal authority, flowing from the top down and vesting decisions in a small number of people. Facilitative power, in contrast, is based on mutuality and synergy, and it flows in multiple directions. The hierarchy remains intact, but leaders use their authority to support professional give–and–take. Schools may be especially appropriate arenas for this type of power because teaching requires autonomy and discretion, not standardized formulas. Teachers can't succeed just by imposing mandates on students; rather, they have to work indirectly, creating conditions under which students will learn. Principals control learning even less directly; they have to create environments in which teachers can work effectively. Facilitative power is not power over. It may be power through people or simply power to enable others.

Facilitative environments are rich, complex, and unpredictable, demanding leadership skills that go beyond expertise. The act of leading through others is not easily reduced to simple formulas. Clearly, facilitative leaders behave differently from traditional leaders. They spend much of their time negotiating decisions they could unilaterally make; they encourage competitive and dissenting views from others; they make decisions on the fly, in corridors and classrooms. But successful facilitation may depend much less on any particular set of behaviors than on the underlying belief system. "A letting go of control and an increasing belief that others can and will function independently and successfully within a common framework of expectations and accountability," seems to be the imperative. Achieving this trust is not a trivial task as it involves "the management of tensions."

Facilitative leadership creates a landscape of constantly shifting responsibilities and relationships, yet the formal system continues to turn to one person for results. Principals may wonder about the wisdom of entrusting so much to those who will not share the accountability; teachers may be nervous about being enveloped in school–wide controversies from which they are normally buffered.

The new approach may create great excitement and high expectations, and thereby unleash multiple initiatives that stretch resources, drain energy, and fragment the collective vision. Somehow the principal must keep a hand on the reins without discouraging the innovators. At the same time, the risky business of change will intensify teachers' traditional demands for emotional support and protection from bureaucratic demands. The facilitative leader must know when to provide this support and when to challenge the comfortable status quo.

The above ideas and concepts have been tried out in the schools we associated with and they resulted in very encouraging results and positive ambience for both students and staff as reflected in the improved nature and quantum of initiatives and improvements. Schools like ours in India, which is a developing country, should explore such ideas in management and leadership sincerely and earnestly.