PurposeEstablished educational leadership discourse has been dominated by Anglo‐American perspectives oblivious to the cultural diversity that characterizes the contemporary world. It has frequently privileged mono‐cultural, mainstream values which have meant indigenous and ethnic groups have suffered alienation, exclusion and disadvantage. Western‐led educational interventions in developing nations also frequently fail to acknowledge the rich cultural traditions of recipient societies and theories and practice are rarely appropriately scrutinized for “cultural fit”. The purpose of this paper is to construct a theory for leadership in intercultural contexts.Design/methodology/approachThe article reviews how monocultural assumptions of colonial and national leadership cultures in the past were frequently inappropriate for the diverse populations they were intended to serve. The global era has witnessed the emergence of cross‐cultural theory and research paradigms to combat cultural blindness and develop cultural sensitivities. While applauding these developments, the epistemological assumptions that underlie such research are questioned. A case for more nuanced theory, which acknowledges complex interactions between agents from different cultures, is developed. This includes a call for more dynamic research tools based upon constructivist and phenomenological premises.FindingsCross‐cultural research has generated territorial maps that promote insight and mutual understandings. However, it relies upon essentialist stereotypes that mask the existence of complex sub‐cultures and dynamic forces of change within national cultures. Case study research which taps the subjective understandings of cultural actors is cited to reveal a more complex process of interaction between cultural agents.Research limitations/implicationsThis is a theoretical exploration, not an empirical report. It is limited by the scarcity of existing research in a fledgling field.Practical implicationsThe article encourages researchers to move from observationally based, stereotypical portraits to more nuanced concepts of cultures as complex, multi‐layered and changing phenomena. It establishes the epistemological foundations for future research in inter‐cultural contexts.Originality/valueThe paper develops new directions for future theory and research.

The professional self-images of principals are integrally related to how they perceive and exercise leadership in specific school settings. This study of a balanced sample of male and female leaders from a cross-section of Victorian schools in the late 1990s reveals that there are key variations related to sectorial identity, level and scale of school, institutional histories and even student gender. It supports the development of nuanced theories about leadership and gender that combat essentialist stereotypes which have dominated in past discourse. It also combats simplistic claims based on school level, sector and student gender. The findings carry implications for principal selection and development which require fine-grained discernment by practitioners and theorists in the future.

This chapter focuses upon the interactions between core components of the organizational culture of Australian schools (level and size of schools, sectorial identity, and student gender) and the beliefs of a balanced sample of male and female principals. The findings qualify previous discourse about leadership and gender by suggesting that organizational variables generate significant variations both within and between genders. Some factors draw men and women towards shared belief platforms; others lead to highly significant differences within each gender. The findings thereby question essentialist typecasts which portray men as naturally bureaucratic and instrumental and women as collaborative and nurturing. The concept of "multiple masculinities and femininities" (Connell, 1995), is advanced as a more useful theoretical construct.Australia replicates the pattern of advanced western democracies where schools are highly feminized workplaces but disproportionate percentages of principalships are held by men. This mirrors broader patterns in the workforce where men hold 70% to 80% of administrative, executive and managerial roles. The 1996 census indicated that although 69% of teachers in Australia were women, only a third of school principals in Australia were female (ABS Census, 1998;Connell, 1987). In the state of Victoria, where this study was conducted, 67% were males and 37% were females. Observations that Canadian and English schools are institutions where "men manage and women teach" (Ozga, 1993;Reynolds, 1995) would appear to be equally applicable to Australia.

This article explores issues related to the delivery of leadership training courses by Western universities in developing nations. It argues that past theories, including cross-cultural perspectives, are too limited to comprehend the complexity of the processes involved. Instead it posits a more dynamic concept of intercultural understanding as an explanatory framework. It also argues that the pedagogy employed is a more powerful instrument of change than subject content. This is illustrated through analysis of responses from 52 participants in a leadership training program conducted in China in 2002.

This article reports on a broad-scale study in the field of leadership and gender. It isbased on research into some 400 male and female principals in Victoria, Australia,between 1996 and 1999. While confirming previous claims that there are significant differencesin the perceptions and beliefs of male and female leaders, it acknowledges theimportance of organizational cultures and values systems. It argues for a sophisticatedresearch lens which comprehends the complex interactions between principals and thecontexts in which they work. Findings with regard to students, teachers and parents areexplored with reference to variables such as level and size of schools, sectorial values andstudent gender. These are linked to an argument that male and female leadership inAustralian schools takes multiple forms and that differences within a gender can be asimportant as differences between them.