Relational Leadership and Stakeholder Co-Production for Quality Education: Advancing SDG 4 and SDG 17 in Catholic Secondary Schools in Eastern Indonesia

Remigius Missa; Maria Veronika Roesminingsih; Bambang Sigit Widodo

doi:10.63230/jocsis.3.1.317

Authors

Remigius Missa State University of Surabaya Author
Maria Veronika Roesminingsih State University of Surabaya Author
Bambang Sigit Widodo State University of Surabaya Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63230/jocsis.3.1.317

Keywords:

Family-School-Community, Organisational Trust, Partnership, Relational Leadership, SDG 4, SDG 17, Stakeholder Co-Production

Abstract

Objective: Investigates how school principals convert relational managerial capabilities into stakeholder co-production that advances Sustainable Development Goal 4 and Sustainable Development Goal 17 across three Catholic secondary schools in Eastern Indonesia. Method: A focused secondary thematic analysis was conducted on a qualitative multi-site case-study dataset generated through in-depth interviews, participant observation, and documentary analysis. Within-site and cross-site analyses examined communication, listening, motivation, recognition, delegation, stakeholder participation, and partnership mobilisation. Results: Six interdependent practices emerged: establishing relational safety, facilitating dialogic sensemaking, institutionalising participatory planning, delegating according to competence, integrating recognition with reciprocal accountability, and mobilising family-school-foundation-community partnerships. These practices strengthened teacher commitment, programme ownership, student support, access to additional resources, and community legitimacy. Context shaped enactment: the resource-constrained school depended more heavily on external networks, whereas the seminary school embedded participation within a shared formation mission. Novelty: The study proposes a relational co-production pathway in which trust and stakeholder participation operate as organisational infrastructure rather than supplementary programmes. The model explains how relational leadership connects school-level managerial practice with quality education (SDG 4) and sustainable partnerships (SDG 17) in faith-based and resource-differentiated settings.

References

Anand, G., Atluri, A., Crawfurd, L., Pugatch, T., & Sheth, K. (2023). Improving school management in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review. Economics of Education Review, 97, Article 102464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2023.102464

Bellibaş, M. Ş., Gümüş, S., & Chen, J. (2024). The impact of distributed leadership on teacher commitment: The mediation role of teacher workload stress and teacher well-being. British Educational Research Journal, 50(2), 814–836. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3944

Boyce, J., & Bowers, A. J. (2018). Toward an evolving conceptualization of instructional leadership as leadership for learning: Meta-narrative review of 109 quantitative studies across 25 years. Journal of Educational Administration, 56(2), 161–182. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-06-2016-0064

Brauckmann, S., Pashiardis, P., & Ärlestig, H. (2023). Bringing context and educational leadership together: Fostering the professional development of school principals. Professional Development in Education, 49(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1747105

Brown, M., McNamara, G., O’Hara, J., Hood, S., Burns, D., & Kurum, G. (2019). Evaluating the impact of distributed culturally responsive leadership in a disadvantaged rural primary school in Ireland. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 47(3), 457–474. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217739360

Bryk, A. S., & Schneider, B. (2002). Trust in schools: A core resource for improvement. Russell Sage Foundation.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.

Daniëls, E., Hondeghem, A., & Dochy, F. (2019). A review on leadership and leadership development in educational settings. Educational Research Review, 27, 110–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.02.003

Freeman, G. T., & Fields, D. (2023). School leadership in an urban context: Complicating notions of effective principal leadership, organizational setting, and teacher commitment to students. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 26(2), 318–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2020.1818133

Galdames-Calderón, M. (2023). Distributed leadership: School principals’ practices to promote teachers’ professional development for school improvement. Education Sciences, 13(7), Article 715. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070715

Garbacz, S. A., Herman, K. C., Thompson, A. M., & Reinke, W. M. (2017). Family engagement in education and school-based intervention: Implementation and evaluation to maximize family, school, and student outcomes. Journal of School Psychology, 62, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2017.04.002

Hallinger, P. (2018). Bringing context out of the shadows of leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143216670652

Hilal, Y. Y., Hammad, W., & Polatcan, M. (2024). Does distributed leadership improve teacher agency? Exploring the mediating effect of teacher reflection. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 52(6), 1369–1387. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221134931

Hitt, D. H., & Tucker, P. D. (2016). Systematic review of key leader practices found to influence student achievement: A unified framework. Review of Educational Research, 86(2), 531–569. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315614911

Hsieh, C.-C., Tai, S.-E., & Li, H.-C. (2026). Impact of school leadership on teacher innovativeness: Evidence from multilevel analysis of Taiwan TALIS 2018. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 46(3), 835–852. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2024.2397040

Huang, L., Huang, Y., & Zhou, S. (2023). Examining principal leadership effects on teacher professional learning in China: A multilevel analysis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 51(6), 1278–1300. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432211041626

Ibrahim, A., & Aljneibi, F. (2022). The influence of personal and work-related factors on teachers’ commitment during educational change: A study on UAE public schools. Heliyon, 8(11), Article e11333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11333

Ibrahim, A., Alshehhi, S., & Tsingilis, N. (2026). Association between distributed leadership and teachers’ organizational commitment: Evidence from public and private schools in the United Arab Emirates. PLOS ONE, 21(6), Article e0351540. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0351540

Kavgacı, H. (2026). Does relational context matter? Trust in principal as a moderator between distributed leadership and organisational citizenship behaviours in Turkish schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 54(2), 496–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432241292938

Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2020). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership & Management, 40(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1596077

Lin, Q. (2022). The relationship between distributed leadership and teacher innovativeness: Mediating roles of teacher autonomy and professional collaboration. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 948152. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.948152

Liu, Y., Bellibaş, M. Ş., & Printy, S. (2018). How school context and educator characteristics predict distributed leadership: A hierarchical structural equation model with 2013 TALIS data. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(3), 401–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143216665839

Lv, X., Yan, R., & Wang, S. (2025). The relationship between family-school-community collaboration and students’ academic achievement: A moderated mediation model. International Journal of Educational Research, 134, Article 102774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2025.102774

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage.

Missa, R. (2023). Keterampilan manajerial peningkatan mutu sekolah: Studi multi situs pada tiga SMA Yasukda Flores Nusa Tenggara Timur [Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Negeri Surabaya].

Pan, H.-L. W., & Chen, W.-Y. (2021). How principal leadership facilitates teacher learning through teacher leadership: Determining the critical path. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(3), 454–470. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220913553

Povey, J., Campbell, A. K., Willis, L.-D., Haynes, M., Western, M., Bennett, S., Antrobus, E., & Pedde, C. (2016). Engaging parents in schools and building parent-school partnerships: The role of school and parent organisation leadership. International Journal of Educational Research, 79, 128–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.07.005

Sahlin, S. (2022). Teachers making sense of principals’ leadership in collaboration within and beyond school. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 66(5), 754–774. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2022.2043429

Sanchez, J. E., Paul, J. M., & Thornton, B. W. (2022). Relationships among teachers’ perceptions of principal leadership and teachers’ perceptions of school climate in the high school setting. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 25(6), 855–875. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1708471

Savaş, G., Arslan, K., & Kılınç, A. Ç. (2026). Unveiling the association between principal learning-centered leadership and teacher collaboration: The mediating role of psychological safety. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 25(2), 193–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2025.2592759

Sezer, Ş., & Uzun, T. (2023). The relationship between school principals’ social-emotional education leadership and teachers’ organizational trust and job performance. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 26(6), 1062–1081. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2020.1849812

Sheridan, S. M., Smith, T. E., Kim, E. M., Beretvas, S. N., & Park, S. (2019). A meta-analysis of family-school interventions and children’s social-emotional functioning: Child and community influences and components of efficacy. Review of Educational Research, 89(2), 296–332. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318825437

Smith, T. E., Reinke, W. M., Herman, K. C., & Sebastian, J. (2021). Exploring the link between principal leadership and family engagement across elementary and middle school. Journal of School Psychology, 84, 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2020.12.006

Smith, T. E., & Sheridan, S. M. (2019). The effects of teacher training on teachers’ family-engagement practices, attitudes, and knowledge: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 29(2), 128–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2018.1460725

Tan, C. Y. (2024). Influence of principal leadership across contexts on the science learning of students. Asia Pacific Education Review, 25, 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-023-09828-2

Tan, C. Y., Dimmock, C., & Walker, A. (2024). How school leadership practices relate to student outcomes: Insights from a three-level meta-analysis. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 52(1), 6–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432211061445

Tan, C. Y., Gao, L., & Shi, M. (2022). Second-order meta-analysis synthesizing the evidence on associations between school leadership and different school outcomes. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 50(3), 469–490. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220935456

Toropova, A., Myrberg, E., & Johansson, S. (2021). Teacher job satisfaction: The importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educational Review, 73(1), 71–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2019.1705247

United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations.

Xu, Z., & Pang, N. S.-K. (2024). Promoting teachers’ organizational commitment: The effects of authentic leadership, teachers’ well-being and social-emotional competence. Behavioral Sciences, 14(10), Article 862. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14100862

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.