High Trust Leadership and Blended Learning in the Age of Disruptive Innovation: Strategic Thinking for Colleges and Schools of Education.
We introduce diverse definitions of leadership and its evolutionary history and then we integrate this idea network: strategic thinking, high trust leadership, blended learning, and disruptive innovation. Following the lead of Marx's (2014) model of Teaching Leadership and Strategy and Rehm's (2014) model of High School Student Leadership Development, we identify how the Holland and Piper (2014) Technology Integration Education (TIE) model serves as a complementary guide for assessing the leadership performance of preservice teachers, who will be educating future K 12 leaders. We identify 20 research questions that education colleges and schools can use as evidence based management in their undergraduate courses and their doctoral programs in education leadership. We conclude by recommending the special leadership role that colleges and schools of education play in sustaining democracy. Introduction Leadership is one of the most highly researched and widely written topics by both academics and practitioners (Miner, 2002, 2005) In the past 25 years, thousands of articles and books have been written on leadership, including the field of leadership and education reform (Owens, 2004; Owens Valesky, 2011; Peck Reitzug, 2012) Each year, hundreds of articles and books are written originally such as Rezvani (2010) or revised subsequently such as Kouzes and Posner (2012) and Bolman and Deal (2013) Northouse (2013) defined leadership as "a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal" (p. 5) In Hughes, Ginnett, and Curphy's (2012) popular textbook, they reviewed eight definitions of leadership by researchers and reached this consensus: "All considered, we find that defining leadership as 'the process of influencing an organized group toward accomplishing its goals' is fairly comprehensive and helpful" (p. 4) Marx (2014) summarized the evolution of leadership research where Trait Theories (1930s) Behavioral Theories (1940s and 1950s) Contingency Theories (1960s and 1970s) SubstituteJournal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/T2 Volume 15 Issue 2 Theory 75 for Leadership Theories (1970s) Transformational Theories (1970s and 1980s) and Strategic Theories (1980s and 1990s) dominated their respective decade(s) To this evolution, we would add the emergence of High Trust Leadership. Horn and Staker (2015) advanced this bold diffusion statement: "You can't go more than a few steps these days without hearing about blending learning. It's at the top of the list of trending topics related to changing education" (p. 31) Evidence of Horn and Staker's prediction can be found in the plethora of books such as Arney (2015) and conferences such as the International Association for K 12 Online Learning (iNACOL) 2015 and 2016 blended learning symposia. To understand the ubiquity of blended learning, we introduce disruptive innovation and its originator Clayton Christensen in comparative context. Harvard University's motto is Veritas (truth) Its truth motto represents the discovery and diffusion of ideas, including the ideas from these three thought leaders. Harvard economist Joseph Schumpeter (1942) gave us creative destruction, which refers to the rise and fall of firms in capitalism. Harvard business professor Michael Porter (1985) gave us competitive advantage, which refers to firms generating new processes and products to satisfy consumers better than their competitors. And Harvard business professor Clayton Christensen (1997) gave us disruptive innovation, which refers to firms discovering less demanding consumers who value products that are relatively convenient, simple, and inexpensive. About Schumpeter's influence, McCraw (2008) wrote that "The book you are about to read is one of the seminal nonfiction works of the last hundred years" (p. ix) About Porter's influence, Marx (2014) wrote that "Michael Porter (1980) has arguably exerted more influence over strategic planning than any other student of strategy over the past fifty years" (p. 79) Since 1997, Clayton Christensen has become one of the country's most influential business professors. Christensen has expanded his ideas beyond the world of for profit organizations to the product and service areas of non profit organizations such as health care (2008) and education (2010) Because of this success, he has a think do tank named in his honor, the Christensen Institute. Consequently, given Christensen's increasing influence, our primary title includes in the Age of Disruptive Innovation. "We stand at the vanguard of a shift in education," proclaimed Christensen (2015, p. xv) Indeed, Christensen's statement is both thought provoking and action provoking! When faced with such a thought provoking and action provoking observation, many organizations, including and especially colleges and schools of education, will begin thinking strategically about hightrust leadership and blended learning. We organize our paper with this narrative. We begin by summarizing this network of ideas: strategic thinking, high trust leadership, blended learning, and disruptive innovation. Next, following the lead of Marx's (2014) model of "Teaching Leadership and Strategy" and Rehm's (2014) model of "High School Student Leadership Development," we identify how the Holland and Piper (2014) Technology Integration Education (TIE) model serves as a complementary guide for assessing the leadership performance of preservice teachers. These future teachers will not only be leaders themselves, but they will also be educating future leaders Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/T2 Volume 15 Issue 2 Theory 76 at the K 12 levels. Then we identify 20 research questions for high trust leadership and blended learning that education colleges and schools can use as evidence based management in their undergraduate courses and their doctoral programs in education leadership. We conclude by recommending the special leadership role that colleges and schools of education play in sustaining democracy by promoting high trust leadership and blended learning in the age of disruptive innovation. Strategic Thinking for Colleges and Schools of Education Strategic Thinking. Although Christensen's (2015) statement about "the vanguard of a shift in education" refers to K 12 organizations, his statement is equally applicable to higher education organizations, which inform and form a diverse and tightly coupled network among K12 organizations. Arizona State University president Crow and historian Dabars (2015) observed that "The public research university is a highly successful model, but this does not diminish the imperative for new and differentiated models that more squarely address the needs of the nation in the twenty first century" (p. 297) Moreover, as part of their strategic planning processes, colleges and schools of education continue to differentiate their brand portfolios, including their Ed.D. and Ph.D. programs in leadership. Thus, we believe that our ideas will serve as a preliminary pathway for education colleges and schools in their strategic thinking, doing, and performing processes. Marx (2014) noted that "Strategy is as old as human conflict" (p. 75) Sloan (2006) recalled that the word strategy originates from the Greek word strategos. According to Sloan, "The Greeks regarded strategic wisdom as oscillating between different positions and perspectives toward a particular purpose" (p. 4) The academic discipline of strategic management includes 10 schools (Mintzberg, Ahlstrand, Lampel, 1998) Porter's (1980, 1985, 1990) ideas have had immense influence on diverse organizations around the globe. In the relatively nascent academic field of strategic management, Porter's contributions have been categorized as significant to the Positioning School (Mintzberg, et al. 1998) and to strategic planning (Marx, 2014) We turn to Sloan (2006) as our guide. In contrast to the Positioning School (which sees strategy formation as an analytical process and at times is equated with the term strategic planning) the Learning School (which sees strategy formation as an emergent process) would perhaps best categorize Sloan's "strategic thinking." As Sloan (2006) stated, "Truly innovative strategic thinking is not about playing out new patterns in existing frameworks, but, rather, about creating new frameworks and different patterns within these new frameworks" (p. 145) Consequently, we begin to advance the beginnings of a new framework by integrating high trust leadership, blended learning, and disruptive innovation. High Trust Leadership Trust. From diverse disciplines, social scientists such as Fukuyama (1995) Hardin (2002) Light (2011) and Liu and Hanauer (2011) have written about the importance of trust in society. They viewed trust as a form of social capital, which enhances exchange relationships Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V15/I2/T2 Volume 15 Issue 2 Theory 77 and facilitates communication across individual, group, organizational, and societal levels. Brookings Institution researchers Goldsmith and Eggers (2004) raised this question: "How can network architects encourage trust based relationships?" (p. 129) Carnevale (1995) stated that "Trust expedites learning" (p. 30) The concerns and consequences of trust are interdisciplinary. Consequently, to understand high trust leadership, we summarize the views of four diverse authors who have both academic and practical insights and experiences across forprofit and non profit organizations. Carnevale's high trust leadership. Carnevale (1995) director of programs in public administration at the University of Oklahoma, highlighted the theory of high trust leadership: The high performing organization insists on a different type of leadership. In a sentence: The goal of all leadership in high performing organizations is to reduce subordinate dependency and build self leadership