Contemporary Research Analysis Journal

Authentic leadership has been gaining momentum in being a critical element in molding organizational performance and culture especially in the education sector. Its focus on honesty, openness, integrity, and trust enables it to emerge as a leadership style that will enhance collaboration and knowledge sharing amongst teachers. Effective knowledge management in the Malaysian secondary schools becomes imperative in order to have continuous learning, innovation, and better performance of schools. The research design here was quantitative involving a 10-point Likert-scale questionnaire issued to secondary school teachers in some of the districts within Kedah, Malaysia. The instrument also assessed the perceptions of the teachers on authentic leadership exhibited by their principals and also the usage of knowledge management in their schools. The real-life leadership authenticity was measured using descriptive statistics, correlation, and multiple regressions to investigate how authentic leadership affects knowledge management practices. The findings showed that authentic leadership contributes positively to knowledge management practices at a significant level. Specifically, the authentic leadership traits in principals increased levels of information sharing, collaborative learning, and innovation of teachers. Authentic leadership has also shown a significant level of variance in knowledge management denoting its usefulness of predicting how knowledge management can be increased in schools. By instilling the true values in the leadership activities, the principals have the chance to develop a knowledge-based culture where teachers are empowered, learning occurs, and long-term competitiveness is fostered in the secondary education. 

Authentic leadership, knowledge management practices, secondary school teachers, collaborative learning, information sharing, educational leadership

1. Ahmad, K. (2007). Leadership and work motivation from the cross-cultural perspective. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 17(1/2), 30–54. https://doi.org/10.1108/10569210710774767
2. Avolio, B. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2005). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 315–338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.001
3. Begley, P. T. (2006). Self-knowledge, capacity and sensitivity: Prerequisites to authentic leadership by school principals. Journal of Educational Administration, 44(6), 570–589. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230610704892
4. Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.611
5. Donate, M. J., & de Pablo, J. D. S. (2015). The role of knowledge-oriented leadership in knowledge management practices and innovation. Journal of Business Research, 68(2), 360–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.06.022
6. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). Teachers College Press.
7. Fullan, M. (2014). The principal: Three keys to maximizing impact. Jossey-Bass.
8. Gardner, W. L., Cogliser, C. C., Davis, K. M., & Dickens, M. P. (2011). Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), 1120–1145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.09.007
9. Hassan, A., & Ahmed, F. (2011). Authentic leadership, trust and work engagement. International Journal of Human and Social Sciences, 6(3), 164–170.
10. Henderson, J. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1983). Leader authenticity: The development and test of an operational measure. Educational and Psychological Research, 3(2), 63–75.
11. Ilies, R., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Authentic leadership and eudaemonic well-being: Understanding leader–follower outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 16(3), 373–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.002
12. Ismail Noor. (2000). Kepimpinan pendidikan: Teori dan amalan. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
13. Leithwood, K., & Seashore Louis, K. (2012). Linking leadership to student learning. Jossey-Bass.
14. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2013). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013–2025. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education.
15. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press.
16. Razak, A., Darmawan, I. G. N., & Keeves, J. P. (2016). Teacher commitment. In L. W. Anderson (Ed.), International encyclopedia of teaching and teacher education (pp. 512–517). Pergamon.
17. Tie, F. H. (2014). School leadership in Malaysia: Challenges and reforms. In P. Hallinger & J. C. Lee (Eds.), Exploring the impact of educational leadership on school reforms (pp. 85–103). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-558-2_6
18. Walumbwa, F. O., Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Wernsing, T. S., & Peterson, S. J. (2008). Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. Journal of Management, 34(1), 89–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308913
19. Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., Avey, J. B., & Oke, A. (2010). Authentically leading groups: The mediating role of collective psychological capital and trust. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32(1), 4–24. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.653
20. Wong, C. A., & Cummings, G. G. (2009). Authentic leadership: A new theory for nursing or back to basics? Journal of Health Organization and Management, 23(5), 522–538. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777260910984014