1. What is the research question (purpose) of the study? 2. What is the research hypothesis? 3. What is the dependent variable? 4. What is the independent variable? 5. Describe the data used by the authors for their analysis. 6. What are the findings?

PAR PUBLIC ASPA ADMINISTRATION REVIEW Rusi Sun University of Michigan-Dearborn Alexander C. Henderson Long Island University Transformational Leadership and Organizational Processes: Influencing Public Performance Rusi Sun is assistant professor in the Abstract: Leaders are essential actors in public performance improvement and organizational change. However, a key Department of Social Sciences at the University of Michigan-Dearborn. Her question has not been adequately addressed in prior literature on the topic: how do leadership processes make a difference? research interests include leadership and Using data on New York City public schools, this article explores the organizational mechanisms by which a specific form organizational behavior, organizational of principal's leadership-transformational leadership-influences objective organizational outcomes as measured by goals and design, personnel management and performance measurement in public standardized test scores. The empirical results indicate that a principal's transformational leadership style affects student and nonprofit organizations. test scores through the mediating effects of purposeful performance information use and stakeholder engagement. E-mail: rusisun@umich.edu Alexander C. Henderson is assistant Practitioner Points professor in the Department of Health . Organizations should encourage managerial behavior that fits within the realm of transformational Care and Public Administration at Long leadership; this can include initial or annual training courses for new managers that specifically encourage Island University. His current research such behavior. examines administrative discretion, personnel management, and performance School leaders can support improved student performance by being attentive to the manner in which measurement and management in public organizational processes match and support leadership style. and nonprofit organizations. He is a felow of the Center for Organizational Research Engagement with stakeholders may shape improved student outcomes by signaling to those inside and and Design (CORD) and previously served outside the organization, including parents and employees, that the mission and function of the organization as chief administrative officer, operational are important and worthy of their attention and effort. officer, director, and volumeer with several . Attention to the collection and meaningful use of performance information may support improved student nonprofit organizations in suburban Philadelphia. outcomes by shaping goal-setting activities, providing feedback on performance, and making targeted E-mail: alexander. hendersonliu.edu changes to organizational processes. ffective leadership has long been a focus of administrative reforms and public service 2014; Park and Rainey 2008; Trottier, Van Wart, and Wang 2008; Vigoda-Gadot and Beeri 2012). improvement initiatives (Moynihan, Pandey, However, the literature remains deficient in studies and Wright 2012; Oberfield 2014). Although that examine how transformational leaders may some scholars argue that leaders in public sector make meaningful contributions to an organization's organizations are more subject to external influences performance (Yukl 1999). Two primary perspectives than their private sector counterparts, and thus have emerge from the research on underlying influential little impact on organizational outcomes (Rainey processes of transformational leadership. Some 2009), the cumulative evidence suggests otherwise pay attention to the dyadic processes of influence (Fernandez, Cho, and Perry 2010). Public sector (e.g., Wang et al. 2005), while others focus on the leaders are believed to play an active and essential organizational processes and identify managerial role in decision making and deploying resources in arrangements through which transformational shaping organizational success (Ingraham, Joyce, and leadership has more profound effects (Moynihan, Donahue 2003; Van Wart 2003). Pandey, and Wright 2012; Wright, Moynihan, and Pandey 2012). The underlying argument is that the The positive impacts of transformational leadership formalized practices are necessary to translate leaders' on individual-, group-, and organizational-level visions into substantive action and institutionalize outcomes have been well documented, including their effects; otherwise, the vision remains an empty higher subordinate job satisfaction, cooperation, dream. The purpose of this study is to develop organizational citizenship behaviors, commitment, and empirically test a conceptual model that Public Administration Review. performance information use, perceived work specifies the organizational processes through which Vol. 77, Iss. 4, pp. 554-565. @ 2016 by The American Society for Public Administration. quality, and mission valence (Kroll and Vogel 2014; transformational leadership affects the performance of DOI: 10.111 1/puer. 12654. Moynihan, Pandey, and Wright 2012; Oberfield public organizations. 554 Public Administration Review . July| August 2017This research makes two contributions to research on rransformartional leadership. First, as Yukl notes, in many cases \"[o]rganizational processes ... receive insufficient attention in most theories of wransformational leadership (1999, 288). Focusing on an organizational perspective, we furcher investigate the indirect effects of transformational leadership through formalized processes. Another issue comes in the form of mixed findings on the notion of transformational leaders' impact on the performance of public organizations, with existing research suffering from some limitations in terms of measurement and research design (Yammarino, Spangler, and Bass 1993). Taking advantage of distinct methods of measuring relevant constructs and research design, this study provides rare empirical evidence to bolster the linkages between transformatianal leadership and better performance in public organizations, The profound effects of transformational leadership are described by Burns (1978) in terms of changing followers \"from an individual-oriented, hedonistie, rational-economic mode of operation to a collective, moral and value-oriented mode of operation\" (Shamir, House, and Arthur 1993, 579). We identified three managerial practices that allow leaders to institutionalize this \"transformational effect\": building a collaborative culture, purposefully using performance information, and engaging with external stakeholders. Results of this study indicate that transformational leadership has a positive bur indirect impact on performance improvement. This study uses data from the New York City (NYC) public school system, where reforms during 2002 and 2012 provide an opportunity to examine how public sector leaders influence organizational outcomes. In 2001, Mayor Michael Bloomberg overhauled the NYC education system by, in part, moving authority from regional administration to schools and combining autonomy and accountability. Under these reforms, principals were expected to function as \"vehicles of change\" and shoulder the responsibility of improving school performance (O'Day, Bitter, and Talbert 2011). Principals were held accountable for more rigorous performance criteria through results-oriented management systems (Childress et al. 2011), they were to play the lead in school-wide inquiries aimed at strengthening collaboration (Talbert 2011), and they facilitated communication and engagement with parents (Henig et al. 2011). Principals also had more flexibility in hiring teachers, choosing professional development and instructional improvement providers, and making spending decisions. These reforms, when considered in tandem with data made available by the NYC Department of Education (DOE) for more than 1,000 public schools (see also Charbonneau and Van Ryzin 2012; Favero and Meier 2013), allow us to test an impartant research question in leadership theory: how does a principal's transformational leadership style make meaningful contributions ro the public school's performance? This article proceeds in three parts. First, previous research on transformational leadership theory and the mediating effects of the three organizational mechanisms are reviewed, and corresponding hypotheses are presented. Second, we intraduce our measures of the main independent and dependent variables and present our findings. Finally, conclusions and the implications of our findings are discussed. Literature Review and Theoretical Framework Transformational Leadership and Processes of Influence In his groundbreaking work, Burns (1978) introduced a new leadership paradigm that he called \"wansformational leadership.\" The old paradigm was built on contracrual relationships between leaders and subordinates and overemphasized the leader's power base (Burns 1978). Burns argued thar transformational leaders, in contrast, do more than create an exchange relationship and discipline subordinates; they are able to motivate followers to seek higher-order needs, to look beyond their self-interest to the organizational goals, and to elevate their sense of morality to \"more principled levels of judgment\" (Burns 1978, 455). Bass and Avolio (1994) advanced Burns's early work and formulated a more systematic model of transformational leadership. They identified four salient dimensions of wansformational leadership (the \"Four I's"): idealized influence, inspiration, intellecrual stimularion, and individual consideration. Transformarional leaders hold high ethical and moral standards and act as role models who inspire admiration and trust in followers. They provide an appealing vision and generate enthusiasm among subordinares, which strengthens employees' commitment to organizational goals, In addition, they solicit new ideas from subordinates and encourage them to perform tasks using new approaches. Finally, this type of leader artends to subordinates' needs and creates a supportive environment for growth (Avolio 1999; Bass 1997, 1998; Bass and Avolio 1994). 'Transformational leadership theory helps us understand how leaders can motivate subordinates \"to do more than they originally expected to do\" (Bass 1997, 133). However, scholars have noticed deficiencies in current research on rransformational leadership, including substantial overlaps with other forms of effective leadership, insufficient description of both underlying processes and contingencies, and the possibility of confounding the leader's behavior and its effect on followers in the measurement. These shortcomings present fundamental problems of clarity and consistency in conceptualization of the term (Van Knippenberg and Sitkin 2013; Yukl 1999). We argue that one of the benefits of more focused analysis of the indirect effects of transformarional leadership is thar the mediating process can \"reveal\" transformartional leadership (Moynihan, Pandey, and Wright 2014) and thus help articulate the attributes and behaviors of transformarional leadership. Given these points, additional research to identify essential influence processes is clearly needed. Over the past two decades, studies of the indirect effects of transformational leadership have adopted ane of twa perspectives. The first group examines individual subordinates and argues that the effect of transformational leadership is mediated by \"a series of dyadic interactions over time\" (Yukl 1999, 287), for example, cultivating desirable leader-member interactions (leader-member exchange) (Wang et al. 2005) and shaping followers' self-concepts (Shamir, House, and Archur 1993). A second group examines the organizational processes and formalized managerial practices that underpin the behaviors of transformation-oriented leaders. Even though transformational leadership does not directly factor in here, it can make meaningful contributions through leveraging essential organizational conditions; these include clarifying an organization's Transformational Leadership and Organizational Processes: Influencing Public Performance 555 goals, fostering a developmental culture, developing internal communication, gaining political support, and elevating public service motivation (Moynihan, Pandey, and Wrighe 2014). In this study, our major concern is the organizational processes through which transformarional leaders exert influence. We base the investigation on the central tenet of transformartional leadership as originally articulated by Burns (1978): that organizational processes enable employees to transcend self-interest by focusing on organizational goals and collective outcomes and by raising employee awareness of social values. We identify three managerial practices in which such a \"rransformational effect\" is embedded: developing a collaborative culture, the meaningful use of performance information, and involving external stakeholders. According to Bedwell et al. (2012), a collaborative culture is based on beliefs and values that support and encourage individuals to engage in interacrive processes to achieve a shared goal. It is characterized by mutual trust and appreciation berween individuals, cooperation and participation, and opportunities for building cohesion (Hoegl and Gemuenden 2001; Sherony and Green 2002). A collaborarive culture can result in desirable social exchanges within an organization, which generate a high level of perceived organizational support and thus contribute to strong employee emotional atrachment and commitment to the organization (Cropanzano and Mitchell 2005; Ferres, Connell, and Travaglione 2004). Such employees are more likely to internalize organizational goals and work for the sake of the organization, Purposeful use of performance informartion is defined here as the use of performance information to improve decision making and to strengthen internal management (Moynihan and Landuyt 200%; Sun and Van Ryzin 2014). It can foster \"collective rather than individual benefit\" (Moynihan, Pandey, and Wright 2012, 147) and creates a focus on an organization's overall effectiveness. Focusing on performance can be used as an instirutionalized tool to unify employees and to ensure that all activities are directed toward the same objectives {Ingraham, Joyce, and Donahue, 2003). Erhics and democratic values are central to a public organization's conduct. Deliberatively including multiple external stakeholder groups in decisions strengthens the democratic norms and public values within an organization (Yang and Pandey 2011) and helps public employees to form a sense of duty and moral obligation to work for the common good of the community (Groves and LaRocca 2011; Paarlberg and Lavigna 2010; Perry and Wise 1990). Transformational Leadership and Collaborative Culture Leaders are important actors who shape and reinforce culwure through policy making and management (Ogbonna and Harris 2000). Transforming followers' behavior by shaping their beliefs and norms through daily interaction are the critical methods through which transformarional leaders exert influence (Moynihan, Pandey, and Wright 2012; Sarros, Cooper, and Santora 2008). Transformarional leaders reform the organizational culture in a manner that reflects their vision (Bass 1985). This type of leader 556 Public Administration Review * July|August 2017 Inspirational motivation by transformarional leaders fuels collaboration; they create a sense of cohesiveness among followers by communicating a shared vision. can foster a developmental culture thar helps the organization adapr to its environment and obtain essential resources (Moynihan, Pandey, and Wright 2012) while also demonstrating the value of a collaborative culture, which encourages employees to work together for a common goal. Such leaders foster a collaborative culture by communicating shared visions, constructing murual respect and crust, and providing opportunities for cooperation berween employees (Demir 2008). Inspirational motivation by transformarional leaders fuels collaborarion; they create a sense of cohesiveness among followers by communicating a shared vision. Because collaboration should be grounded in the situation in which members pursue the same ends, a shared vision makes it possible to reduce individual isolation and thus generate more opportunities for collaboration. Moreover, transformational leadership fosters sharing of ideas and knowledge and encourages employees o offer different points of view (Bass and Avolio 1994; Garcia-Morales, Jimnez-Barrionuevo and Gurirrez- Gurirrez 2012). Transformational leaders may involve employees in collaborative organizational goal setting and organizational problem solving. In a school setting, this may include a shared understanding of collective goals for overall student performance and reflecting together on improving instruction (Demir 2008). Transformational leadership, then, can reinforce ideas about the contribution one's colleagues may make to their work. Although it is an \"intangible\" factor of organizational life, studies of the effect of organizational culture on performance have found that a collaborative culture characterized by coworkers\" mutual trust and respect, interdependence, and partnership may reduce interpersonal conflicts and strengthen cooperation among employees (Barczak, Lassk, and Mulki 2010). Therefore, it can increase employees' job satisfaction (Cook and Wall 1980), affective commitment, and perceived organizational support and can reduce turnover intention (Ferres, Connell, and Travaglione 2004), leading to better individual performance (Kegan and Rubenstein 1973). Given the mediating effect of collaborative culture on the linkage between transformational leadership and organizational performance, we propose the following: Hypothesis 1: A school's collaborative culture mediares the relationship between its principal's transformational leadership and school performance. Transformational Leadership and Performance Information Use Integrating performance statistics and information into decision- making and management practices has been seen as eritical to the success of results-oriented management reforms (Kravchuk and Schack 1996; Moynihan, Pandey, and Wright 2012; Sun and Van Ryzin 2014). Among organizational factors, the leader's support is an essential facilitator of the meaningful use of performance information {Julnes and Holzer 2001; Melkers and Willoughby 2005). Transformarional leadership has inherent advanrages here in influencing subordinates and their focus on performance data. First, this type of leader can help employees recognize thar such actions are critical to organizational effectiveness and thus increase their willingness to engage with performance information, despite the time and extra efforc (Moynihan, Pandey, and Wright 2012). Second, the use of performance information in decision making may challenge the strategies and assumptions that underpin an organization's existing policies (Moynihan 2003). Therefore, performance information is more likely to be implemented under a leader who is strongly committed to improvement and organizational change and to overcoming internal skepticism and external difficulties (Kroll and Vogel 2014) Third, the use of performance informarion is also consistent with the notion of organizational learning (Moynihan 2005). On one hand, performance gaps provide a source of learning motives, as they reveal that something did not work as planned. On the other hand, evidence from performance measurement system makes it possible to generate essential feedback and knowledge about whart causes deviance and what might be done to improve performance, which helps decision makers make better-informed decisions, Transformartional leadership marters because it can create an environment conducive to learning by promaoting intellectual stimulation and sending inspirational messages (Garcia-Morales, Jimnez-Barrionuevo, and Gurtirrez-Gutirrez 2012). By allowing employees to express different views and share ideas, and by giving them the discretion to experiment with new approaches, leaders create a climate where failure and mistakes are part of the learning process. If performance information is not used o assign blame, employecs will be encouraged to systematically use it in their work. Additionally, organizational learning is contingent on employees' collective behavior and requires shared accountability (Leithwood, Leonard, and Sharratr 1998). Therefore, a rransformarional leadership style is desirable, as it heightens awareness of collective interest. The potential of using performance information purposefully for better organizational performance is manifest in two mechanisms. One is to strengthen administrators' accountability to stakeholders, and the other is to improve the quality of decision making and internal management. Performance measures help public managers to allocate resources and improvement effores in ways that enhance organizational effectiveness and outcomes (Sanger 2008; Sun and Van Ryzin 2014). Thus, we hypothesize the following: Hypothesis 2: A school's engagement in meaningful use of performance information mediates the relationship between its principal's transformartional leadership and school performance. Transformational Leadership and Stakeholder Engagement The extent to which citizens' views are considered in an organization's decision-making process may be affected by the leadership styles of those with actual authority in the organization (King, Feltey, and Susel 1998). The normarive foundation and ethical values underpinning transformational leadership make it more likely to generate strong beliefs in stakeholder perspecrives By allowing employees to express different views and share ideas, and by giving them the discretion to experiment with new approaches, leaders cre- ate a climate where failure and mistakes are part of the learning process. (Bass and Steidlmeier 1999; Groves and LaRocea 2011). Denhardt and Campbell (2006) assert that, when influenced by transformational leadership processes, organizational changes and the way leaders pursue change are \"moral.\" Thar is, such leaders do not exclusively work to advance their self-interest but rather the interests of the whole communiry. This process is based on \"mutual interaction\" berween leaders and internal and external stakeholders (Denhardt and Campbell 2006, 559). These include their colleagues, followers, and other stakeholders. Their interests are essential to the leadership process (Groves and LaRocca 2011). Consequently, Bass and Steidlmeier {1999) assert that transformational leaders have a strong sense of duty and obligation toward stakeholders, which makes them more likely to value participative governance. Subordinates are also more receptive to stakeholder participation when their leaders exhibit more transformarion-oriented behaviors. Transformational leaders funcrion as role models for employees to emulate (Shamir, House, and Arthur 1993). They may emphasize the role of citizens in decision making when talking about their beliefs or engaging in relevant behaviors that advocate participarion. Additionally, they may integrate the value of stakeholder participation in defining the organization's goals and guiding its subsequent actions and policies, thus inspiring employees to appreciate and adopt the value of stakeholder participation (Groves and LaRocca 2011). As public organizations and policies deal with complex social issues, transformational leaders' ability to stimulate employees to think broadly about inclusion, collaboration, and cooperation with different stakeholder groups is a long-term benefir for organizations. This research lends itself to useful prescription for inclusive stakeholder engagementfostering stakeholder engagement demands a transformational leader. However, there have been few empirical studies of the performance implications of this link, and the results have creared some conflict over the real impacr of stakeholder participation on the effectiveness of public organizations (King, Feltey, and Susel 1998; Kweit and Kweit 2004; Thomas 2012). Here, we test the connections between transformational leadership, parental engagement, and school performance. Hypothesis 3: A school's parental engagement mediates the relationship between its principal's transformartional leadership and school performance. Controlling for Alternative Explanations In this study, we control for school, teacher, and student characreristics that are known to affect school performance but may be beyond the control of school leaders. First, schools with a higher percentage of students from low-income or disadvantaged backgrounds might be expected to have more difficulty artaining high performance (Caldas and Bankston 1997). Therefore, we include a variable for the percentage of low-income students (represented by the percentage of students enrolled in the reduced or free lunch program). We also control for the racial/ethnic Transformational Leadership and Organizational Processes: Influencing Public Performance 557 composition of the student body (represented by the percentage of white students) and the percentage of female students. Moreover, teacher qualifications are often construed as an important school resource (Darling-Hammond 1992; Greenwald, Hedges, and Laine 1996). Although there is some controversy concerning the magnitude of the influence of these factors (Hanushek 1996), it is important to control for their possible effects. Therefore, we include two control variables measuring teachers' qualifications: the percentage of teachers with more than two years of teaching experience in the school, and the percentage of teachers holding a master's degree or higher. Methods and Measurement Sample and Data Sources Data for this study were obtained from the NYCDOE. The DOE provides traditional information on test scores, student characteristics, school staffing, and other school characteristics. Furthermore, beginning in the 2006-07 school year and continuing annually until 2009, the DOE conducted an on-site review of schools (hereafter, the \"Quality Review\") and a system-wide survey of teachers, parents, and students (hereafter, the \"School Learning Environment Survey\") thar examined each school's management practices. Data measuring dependent, independent, and control variables were collected during the 2007-08 school year. Dara from this period are useful for our purposes because the NYCDOE ended the Quality Review for all schools after 2009 as a result of the high cost of review processes (Childress er al. 2011). We tested our model by examining public high school data for mare than 360 high schools from the 2007-08 school year. Afrer ma(ching and c.leaning the available dara, there were a rotal of 300 high schools in our final analytical sample. The data measuring the independent variables were taken from three sources, thus helping reduce po;en(ial mono-method bias. The data on principals' transformartional leadership and schools collaborative culture were drawn from an annual survey of teachers (hereafter the \"Teacher Survey\"), and parental engagement was captured by items from an annual survey of parents (hereafter the \"Parent Survey\"). The population of the Teacher Survey included all pedagogical staff across public schools in NYC (NYCDOE 2008a). During the 2007-08 school year, 48,002 teachers participated in the survey, reflecting an average response rate of 62 percent; 347,829 parents responded to the Parent Survey, for an average response rate of 40 percent (NYCDOE 2008b). The survey results were aggregated art the school level. We used the average score of the answers of all of the respondents to a given question in each school. Individual respondents reported on a four-point Likert scale, where 1 =being \"strongly disagree\" and 4 = \"strongly agree.\" After aggregation to the school level, the scores were transferred to a 10-point scale. In addition to these survey data, this study used data from the Quality Review to assess each school's use of performance information. The NYCDOE's Quality Review consists of an on-site wisit to each school by a team of experienced and trained external reviewers from the DOE who observe a wide range of acrivities at the school related to instructional practices, organizational climare, management techniques, and leadership strategy (NYCDOE 2016). The 2007-08 Quality Review measured 35 criteria related 558 Public Administration Review July|August 2017 to gathering data, planning and setting goals, aligning instructional strategy to goals, aligning capacity building with goals, and monitoring and revising. Each school was rated on these criteria using a five-point scale, where 5 = \"outstanding\" and 1 = \"underdeveloped.\" Measures The details of each of the measures are provided in the appendix, which includes a list of all items and variables used in the research. All study variables were measured using multiple items. The dependent variable is an outcome measure based on high school student performance on standardized examinations. Our choice of this measurement was purposeful: NYC public schools reforms have placed considerable value on student performance on standardized examinations. We chose to focus on the overall student pass rate on the Regents Exams for both English language arts and math. Note that instead of the original (unstandardized) pass rate, the weighted pass rate was used. The weighted pass rate was calculated against expectations (based on eighth-grade test scores) and against peer group and citywide averages (NYCDOE 2012). This method allows gains in school performance to be easily identified. Transformational leadership was measured using seven items depicting the four dimensions of transformational leadership (idealized influence, inspirational motivation, individualized consideration, and intellecrual stimulation), as adapted from Bass and Avolio (1994). To achieve sufficient content validicy, the measures used here include at least one question from each of the four subcomponents of transformational leadership. Teachers were asked to rate their level of trust in their principal; the extent to which the principal communicated a clear vision; whether the principal paid attention to individual reachers and supported their development by giving useful feedback and clarifying expectations; and the extent to which teachers were able to become involved in setting goals and making decisions in a meaningful way. A school's collaborative culture was measured using five items asking respondents about their experiences as teachers in the school, and focused on a number of key cultural dimensions found in existing literature (Bedwell et al. 2012; Hoegl and Gemuenden 2001; Sherony and Green 2002). Individual measures included questions about murual trust, appreciation, and support by teachers and whether teachers work together to improve practice. As noted previously, these are important in creating collaboration and improving individual experiences, both of which may foster individual and group performance. The use of performance information was developed using five items from the Quality Review. These five items caprure the extent w which a school engages in goal setting and planning for improvement processes, the use of assessment tools to measure the effectiveness of plans and interventions for students in both the short and long term, and the use of assessment results in revising the plan. These measures are important in that they place an emphasis on setring measurable goals, the provision of ongoing feedback and targered interventions, and strategic decision making based on performance information, all of which contribute to concepts of accountability and the allocation of resources in ways that improve outcomes, Results Du Toit 2001). standardize tests. CFI=.955; SRMR=.054; RMSEA=0.072) performance on the Regents Exams in English and math. leadership has a strong and positive impact on the school's organizational processes on school performance were slightly (B = 0.20), and parent engagement (B =0.39). The impacts of Table 1 provides the descriptive statistics and correlations for If=2.512; CFI = .944; SRMR= 0.077; RMSEA =0.071). The The structural model provided an adequate fit to the data (X]/ discriminant validity. Five error covariances were freed for the parameter estimates are presented as standardized coefficients. This model accounts for 19 percent of the variation in student following constructs: three for the construct of transformational to these tests, the study variables have sufficient convergent and a 0.1 level. Therefore, hypothesis 1 is not supported. This might latent and its measures is greater than interconstruct correlations, collaborative culture and school performance is not significant at Consistent with the hypotheses, the principal's transformational to which a school communicates their children's behavior and columns (Howell and Avolio 1993). The variance shared by each different from the hypotheses. The positive relationship between the construct of the use of performance information. The revised key assumption of SEM. However, violations of distributional Therefore, prior to SEM analysis, the Normal Score method of for one item in the construct of school performance. The loading the study variables. We assessed the fit of the structural model in suggesting that all items loaded more highly on the construct they purported to measure than on other constructs. In sum, according multiple observed items. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was figure 1 by adding the predicted paths to the measurement model. Six items from the Parent Survey were used to examine schools' analysis approach in this research. Multivariate normality is the important because they link both teacher and school activities to leadership, one for the construct of parent engagement, and one for collaborative culture (B =0.64), the use of performance information average variance extracted. For adequate discriminant validity, these Elements on the diagonal in this matrix show the square root of the the tangible efforts of parents to improve the educational lives of indices should be greater than entries in the corresponding rows and is 0.60. Table 1 shows the correlation matrix of the study constructs. The study measures were modeled as latent variables represented by their children, which may, in turn, boost student performance on performance, answer parents' questions, addresses their concerns, and makes efforts to involve them in meetings. These concepts are used to test how well such measures reflect their intended constructs aggregated to the school level, which caused the data to be skewed. value of the weighted student pass rate on the English Regents Exam measurement model yielded an adequate fit to the data (x?/df=2.531; LISREL 8.8 was used to normalize the data (Joreskog, Sorbom, and efforts to engage parents. Parents were required to report the extent We use structural equation modeling (SEM) as the major statistical and the fit of the measurement model to the data. The factor loadings of all items on their respective constructs were greater than 0.7, except assumptions were detected. The primary reason is that the data were Table 1 Descriptive Statistics and Zero-Order Correlations variable Mean Max M 00 10 Principal's transformational leadership 6.60 1.46 1.84 10.92 (0.81) School's collaborative culture 7.29 0.93 4.68 10.16 0.66 (0.79) N m Transformational Leadership and Organizational Processes: Influencing Public Performance 559 Use of performance information 3.32 0.69 1.20 5.00 0.22 0.27 (0.68 Parent engagement 7.52 0.60 5.60 9.27 0.37 0.44 0.21 (0.83) School performance 1.03 0.26 0.32 1.82 0.15. 0.16* 0.29. 0.18* (0.46) Control Variables Percentage of students enrolled in reduced or 61.22 19.94 1.13 121.31 0.01 0.05 -0.04 0.21* -0.18* n.a free lunch Percentage of female students 51.27 12.86 12.51 87.22 0.09 0.17 0.08 0.14 0.08 -0.10 n.a Percentage of white students 8.77 14.30 -22.58 51.98 0.06 0.01 0.11 -0.10 0.15 -0.60* 0.00 n.a Percentage of teachers with 2+ years of 46.38 26.9 -0.86 128.34 0.03 -0.15* 0.02 -0.24* 0.07 -0.36* -0.10 0.33* teaching experience n.a 2 Percentage of teachers with master's degree 81.03 11.11 47.52 110.63 0.04 0.02 0.02 -0.12* 0.14* -0.37* 0.07 0.33* 0.46* n.a. P