School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis

Münir Şahin

doi:10.59372/turajas.1862497

TR EN

Abstract

Okul Yöneticilerinde Mikro-Otoriter Davranışlar: Kavramsal Bir Analiz

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, okul yöneticilerinde mikro-otoriter davranışların kavramsal yapısını incelemek ve bu davranışların eğitim örgütleri üzerindeki olası sonuçlarını literatüre dayalı olarak ortaya koymaktır. Mikro-otoriter davranışlar, yöneticilerin açık baskı uygulamaksızın, gündelik yönetsel pratikler aracılığıyla kontrol üretmelerini ifade eden örtük ve süreklilik gösteren davranış örüntüleri olarak ele alınmaktadır. Çalışma, derleme türünde tasarlanmış olup, otoriter liderlik, örgütsel sessizlik, psikolojik güvenlik, örgütsel bağlılık ve okul iklimi kavramları çerçevesinde yerli ve yabancı bilimsel yayınlar sistematik biçimde incelenmiştir. Literatür bulguları, mikro-otoriter davranışların öğretmen sessizliğini artırdığını, psikolojik güvenliği aşındırdığını ve öğretmenlerin örgütsel bağlılık ile motivasyon düzeylerini olumsuz etkilediğini göstermektedir. Ayrıca bu davranışların uzun vadede okul ikliminin kapalı, riskten kaçınan ve işbirliğinin zayıfladığı bir yapıya dönüşmesine katkı sunduğu belirlenmiştir. Mikro-otoriter liderliğin, katılım söylemiyle çelişen denetleyici uygulamalar aracılığıyla okul kültüründe sessizliği ve uyumu önceleyen bir norm oluşturduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Çalışma, eğitim yöneticiliği alanında mikro düzeydeki otoriterlik pratiklerinin daha görünür hâle getirilmesi ve okul ikliminin iyileştirilmesine yönelik farkındalık oluşturulması açısından önemli katkılar sunmaktadır.

Keywords

School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the conceptual structure of micro-authoritarian behaviors among school principals and to reveal their possible consequences on educational organizations based on the existing literature. Micro-authoritarian behaviors are defined as subtle, continuous, and implicit control practices through which principals exercise authority in daily managerial interactions without overt coercion. The study was designed as a review and systematically analyzed national and international studies within the framework of authoritarian leadership, organizational silence, psychological safety, organizational commitment, and school climate. The findings indicate that micro-authoritarian behaviors increase teacher silence, erode psychological safety, and negatively affect teachers’ motivation and organizational commitment. Furthermore, these behaviors contribute to the development of a closed school climate characterized by risk avoidance, weakened collaboration, and limited professional dialogue. The literature also suggests that micro-authoritarian leadership transforms participatory discourse into symbolic participation, reinforcing compliance rather than genuine involvement. In the long term, such practices shape a school culture in which silence and conformity become normalized organizational patterns. The study concludes that micro-authoritarian behaviors represent a critical yet often overlooked dimension of school leadership that significantly influences teachers’ professional experiences and the overall school climate. By conceptualizing these subtle control mechanisms, the study provides a theoretical contribution to educational leadership literature and offers a foundation for developing more democratic, transparent, and psychologically safe school environments

Keywords

Ethical Statement

Ethical Statement This study is a review based on a literature review and does not require the collection of data from any human participants. Therefore, ethical committee approval is not required. Academic ethical principles were observed throughout all stages of the study; all sources used were cited in the text and bibliography in accordance with APA 7 rules. Maximum care was taken to ensure the correct citation of sources, to keep quotations within their context, and to adhere to the principle of scientific honesty.

References

Alvesson, M., & Einola, K. (2019). Warning for excessive positivity: Authentic leadership and other traps in leadership studies. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(4), 383–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.04.001
Alvesson, M., & Spicer, A. (2016). The stupidity paradox: The power and pitfalls of functional stupidity at work. Profile Books.
Ashforth, B. E. (1994). Petty tyranny in organizations. Human Relations, 47(7), 755–778. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679404700701
Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell Sage Foundation.
Buluç, B. (2015a). Okul yöneticilerinin liderlik stilleri ile öğretmenlerin örgütsel güven algıları arasındaki ilişki. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 21(2), 171–196.
Buluç, B. (2015b). Okullarda liderlik ve örgütsel iklim ilişkisi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 21(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.14527/kuey.2015.001
Chiang, J. T.-J., Chen, X.-P., Liu, D., Chen, C.-C., & Akutsu, S. (2020). We have emotions but can’t show them: Authoritarian leadership, emotion suppression climate, and team performance. Human Relations, 74(7), 1082–1111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726720908649
Detert, J. R., & Burris, E. R. (2007). Leadership behavior and employee voice. Academy of Management Journal, 50(4), 869–884. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.26279183

Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999
Edmondson, A. C. (2019). The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the workplace for learning, innovation, and growth. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119477242
Einarsen, S., Aasland, M. S., & Skogstad, A. (2007). Destructive leadership behaviour: A definition and conceptual model. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(3), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.03.002
Frazier, M. L., Fainshmidt, S., Klinger, R. L., Pezeshkan, A., & Vracheva, V. (2017). Psychological safety: A meta-analytic review and extension. Personnel Psychology, 70(1), 113–165. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12183
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Pantheon Books.
Foucault, M. (1991). The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality (G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller, Eds.). University of Chicago Press.
Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2012). Professional capital: Transforming teaching in every school. Teachers College Press.
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2013). Educational administration: Theory, research, and practice (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Karadaş, F., & Kurtay, S. (2024). Örgütsel sessizlik ve okul iklimi ilişkisi: Türkiye’de bir inceleme. TEBD, 34(2), 45–62.
Knoll, M., & van Dick, R. (2013). Do I hear the whistle…? A first attempt to measure four forms of employee silence and their correlates. Journal of Business Ethics, 113(2), 349–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1308-4
Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., & White, R. K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10(2), 271–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1939.9713366
Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). Toxic leadership: When grand illusions masquerade as noble visions. Leader to Leader, 2005(36), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/ltl.125
Louis, K. S., Leithwood, K., Wahlstrom, K., & Anderson, S. (2010). Learning from leadership: Investigating the links to improved student learning. Wallace Foundation.
Maşalı, N., Yeter, Z., Erdem, E., & Bedir, A. (2023). Okul yöneticilerinin öğretimsel liderlik davranışlarının incelenmesi: Literatür taraması. ASEAD, 10(2), 177–199.
Mintzberg, H. (2009). Managing. Berrett-Koehler.
Morrison, E. W. (2014). Employee voice and silence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1, 173–197. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091328
Morrison, E. W., & Milliken, F. J. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 706–725. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2000.3707697
Muk, F., & İnandı, Y. (2025). Okul yöneticilerinin demokratik ve otokratik liderlik davranışları ile öğretmenlerin öznel kariyer başarısı arasındaki ilişki. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 74, 283–300.
Nguni, S., Sleegers, P., & Denessen, E. (2006). Transformational and transactional leadership effects on teachers’ job satisfaction. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(2), 145–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243450600565795
Özdemir, S. (2016). Okul iklimi ve okul etkililiği arasındaki ilişki. Eğitim ve Bilim, 41(186), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2016.6000
Özkaya, F., & Kazak, E. (2023). Okul yöneticilerinin toksik liderlik davranışlarının bireysel ve örgütsel etkileri. Anadolu Eğitim Liderliği ve Öğretim Dergisi, 11(2), 362–386.
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Parlar, H., Türkoğlu, M. E., & Cansoy, R. (2021). Exploring how authoritarian leadership affects commitment. International Journal of Educational Management, 36(1), 110–129. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-04-2021-0160
Parlar, H., Türkoğlu, M. E., & Cansoy, R. (2022). Otoriter liderlik ve örgütsel sessizlik ilişkisi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 47(210), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2022.10854
Pizzolitto, E., Verna, I., & Venditti, M. (2023). Authoritarian leadership styles and performance. Management Review Quarterly, 73(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-022-00263-y
Rezky, S., Saragih, R., Fahira, R., Lubis, W., & Winara, W. (2024). Leadership styles and organizational climate. International Journal of Educational Research Excellence, 3(1), 482–487. https://doi.org/10.55299/ijere.v3i1.915
Schaubroeck, J. M., Shen, Y., & Chong, S. (2017). Authoritarian leadership and outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(2), 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000165
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Shen, Y., Chou, W.-J., & Schaubroeck, J. M. (2019). Authoritarian leadership and performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(4), 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1615453
Somech, A. (2010). Participative decision making in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(2), 174–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670510361745
Sugesti, T., Siregar, A. N., & Tanjung, B. N. (2024). Principal leadership model. Holistic Science, 4(2), 338–345. https://doi.org/10.56495/hs.v4i2.667
Şahin, M. (2022). Eğitimde yönetici yetkinlikleri. Akdeniz Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(2), 340–361.
Şahin, M. (2023). The role of school administrators in school improvement. The Journal of International Education Science, 10(34), 382–398. https://doi.org/10.29228/INESJOURNAL.67734
Şahin, M. (2025). Antikırılgan liderlik. EDUCATIONE, 4(2), 61–92. https://doi.org/10.58650/educatione.1754961
Şişman, M. (2014a). Eğitimde mükemmellik arayışı: Etkili okullar. Pegem Akademi.
Şişman, M. (2014b). School culture and leadership (2nd ed.). Pegem Academy.
Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M., Holder, A. M. B., Nadal, K. L., & Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life. American Psychologist, 62(4), 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.62.4.271
Tepper, B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(2), 178–190. https://doi.org/10.5465/1556375
Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision. Journal of Management, 33(3), 261–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307300812
Thapa, A., Cohen, J., Guffey, S., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2013). School climate research review. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 357–385. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313483907
Uhl-Bien, M. (2006). Relational leadership theory. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 654–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.007
Wang, M. T., & Degol, J. L. (2016). School climate. Educational Psychology Review, 28(2), 315–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9319-1
Yukl, G. (2013). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Pearson.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Educational Sociology, Leadership, Strategy, Management and Organisational Behaviour (Other)

Journal Section

Review

Authors

Münir Şahin ^*
0000-0001-5722-496X
Türkiye

Publication Date

April 30, 2026

Submission Date

January 13, 2026

Acceptance Date

April 25, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 9 Number: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.59372/turajas.1862497

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA57CE97WM

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Şahin, M. (2026). School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis. Turkish Research Journal of Academic Social Science, 9(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.59372/turajas.1862497

AMA

1.Şahin M. School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis. TURAJAS. 2026;9(1):1-17. doi:10.59372/turajas.1862497

Chicago

Şahin, Münir. 2026. “School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis”. Turkish Research Journal of Academic Social Science 9 (1): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.59372/turajas.1862497.

EndNote

Şahin M (April 1, 2026) School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis. Turkish Research Journal of Academic Social Science 9 1 1–17.

IEEE

[1]M. Şahin, “School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis”, TURAJAS, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–17, Apr. 2026, doi: 10.59372/turajas.1862497.

ISNAD

Şahin, Münir. “School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis”. Turkish Research Journal of Academic Social Science 9/1 (April 1, 2026): 1-17. https://doi.org/10.59372/turajas.1862497.

JAMA

1.Şahin M. School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis. TURAJAS. 2026;9:1–17.

MLA

Şahin, Münir. “School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis”. Turkish Research Journal of Academic Social Science, vol. 9, no. 1, Apr. 2026, pp. 1-17, doi:10.59372/turajas.1862497.

Vancouver

1.Münir Şahin. School Principals’ Micro-Authoritarian Behaviors: A Conceptual Analysis. TURAJAS. 2026 Apr. 1;9(1):1-17. doi:10.59372/turajas.1862497