Humanities Studios: Pedagogy, Psychology, Philosophy

Conceptual distinction between the concepts of “leader” and “guide”: Philosophical and managerial aspects

Serhii Nemchenko, Iryna Shumilova
Download article
Abstract

The article examined the conceptual and functional differences between the concepts of “leader” and “guide” in the context of modern educational management. The relevance of the topic is due to the need to rethink managerial roles in the context of the transformation of educational systems, the growing importance of strategic vision, value-oriented management and new forms of professional interaction. Despite the widespread presence of the term “guidance” in pedagogical research, the concept of “leadership” remains methodologically vague, which complicates the construction of effective management models. The aim of the study was to determine the conceptual differences between the phenomena of guidance and leadership, as well as to empirically identify the leadership orientations of managers in the educational environment of Ukraine. The methodological basis of the work was a combination of content analysis of scientific sources, etymological and semantic analysis, philosophical hermeneutics and comparative research of management paradigms. The empirical part was based on a survey of 126 respondents from three professional groups: heads of educational institutions, methodologists, and teachers who demonstrated informal guidance (managerial leadership). Three psychometrically validated instruments were used: COPO-2024, ISV-12 and IMM-10. Descriptive statistics methods, correlation, factor, and cluster analysis were applied. The results revealed three integral types of management orientations: semantic mentors, reflective strategists and creative missionaries. It is proven that guidance was formed as a multidimensional phenomenon that combined strategic vision, value-humanistic orientation and the ability to create a semantic space for development. The results obtained made it possible to formulate the authors’ model of the distinction of concepts, in which guidance was interpreted as a phenomenon that integrates intellectual vision, the ability to set the direction of development and create an ideological framework for the formation of managers. The practical significance of the study lies in the possibility of applying the refined conceptual differentiation in management, educational management and strategic planning

Keywords

guidance; leadership; philosophy of management; strategic vision; authors’ model; semantic space of development

Suggested citation
Nemchenko, S., & Shumilova, I. (2026). Conceptual distinction between the concepts of “leader” and “guide”: Philosophical and managerial aspects. Humanities Studios: Pedagogy, Psychology, Philosophy, 14(2), 152-165. https://doi.org/10.31548/hspedagog/2.2026.152
References
  1. Aas, M. (2017). Understanding leadership and change in schools: Expansive learning and tensions. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 20(3), 278-296. doi: 10.1080/13603124.2015.1082630.
  2. American Sociological Association’s Code of Ethics. (2018, June). Retrieved from https://www.asanet.org/wp-content/uploads/asa_code_of_ethics-june2018a.pdf.
  3. Bartlett, M.S. (1951). The effect of standardization on a χ2 approximation in factor analysis. Biometrica, 38(3-4), 337-344. doi: 10.1093/biomet/38.3-4.337.
  4. Bass, B., & Riggio, R.E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Hove: Psychology Press.
  5. Bass, B.M., & Avolio, B.J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  6. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2023). Toward good practice in thematic analysis: Avoiding common problems and be(com)ing a knowing researcher. International Journal of Transgender Health, 24, 1. doi: 10.1080/26895269.2022.2129597.
  7. Bryman, A.E. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London: Sage Publications.
  8. Bush, T. (2025). Instructional leadership in the 21st century: Building on the Hallinger and Murphy PIMRS model. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 53(3), 481-483. doi: 10.1177/17411432251327800.
  9. Cañadas, A., Jácome, R., & Granero, L.P. (2025). Integral humanistic leadership model. Humanistic Management Journal. doi: 10.1007/s41463-025-00213-2.
  10. Day, C., & Gu, Q. (2020). The new lives of teachers (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203847909.
  11. DeVellis, R.F., & Thorpe, C.T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  12. Field, A. (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  13. Fonsén, E., Lahtinen, L., Sillman, M., & Reunamo, J. (2020). Pedagogical leadership and children’s well-being in Finnish early education. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 50(6), 979-994. doi: 10.1177/1741143220962105.
  14. Greenleaf, R.K. (2002). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. Mahwah: Paulist Press.
  15. Hallinger, P. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125-142. doi: 10.1108/09578231111116699.
  16. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (2020). Professional capital after the pandemic: Revisiting and revising classic understandings of teachers’ work. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3-4), 327-336. doi: 10.1108/JPCC-06-2020-0039.
  17. Kaiser, H.F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31-36.
  18. Kielblock, S. (2025). Rethinking leadership in extended education: How collaborative development drives organizational quality. Frontiers in Education, 10, article number 1545842. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1545842.
  19. Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Claims about successful school leadership. School Leadership & Management, 28(1), 27-42. doi: 10.1080/13632430701800060.
  20. Maak, T., & Pless, N.M. (2006). Responsible leadership in a stakeholder society – a relational perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 99-115. doi: 10.1007/s10551-006-9047-z.
  21. MacBeath, J. (2005). Leadership as distributed: A matter of practice. School Leadership & Management, 25(4), 349-366. doi: 10.1080/13634230500197165.
  22. Macpherson, R.J.S. (2025). Bridging moral philosophies and metaphysical paradigms: Rethinking educative leadership for diverse organizational contexts. Ethics and Education, 20(2-3), 319-342. doi: 10.1080/17449642.2025.2495508.
  23. Mphatsoane-Sesoane, L., & Jita, L.C. (2025). Analysing the role of ethical leadership in fostering teacher agency for inclusive digital pedagogical innovation. Discover Education, 4, article number 493. doi: 10.1007/s44217-025-00944-2.
  24. Nemchenko, S.H., Kryzhko, V.V., Bodnar, O.S., Radul, V.V., Starokozhko, O.M., & Kondratenko, Yu.I. (2022). Management of educational institutions. In V.V. Kryzhko & O.S Bodnar (Eds.), Management of educational institutions (pp. 15-33). Berdiansk: Berdiansk State Pedagogical University.
  25. Northouse, P.G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice (9th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
  26. OECD. (2023). Education at a glance 2023: OECD indicators. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/education-at-a-glance-2023_e13bef63-en.html.
  27. Oppong, N. (2025). Innovative strategies for transforming educational leadership in the 21st century. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 29(1), 1-3.
  28. Robinson, V. (2007). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: Making sense of the evidence. In The leadership challenge: Improving learning in schools (pp. 12-16). Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research.
  29. Shumilova, I., Kubitskiy, S., Bazeliuk, V., Rudyk, Y., Hrechanyk, N., Rozhnova, T., & Prykhodkina, N. (2023). The system of forming the emotional and ethical competence of the future education manager in the conditions of transformational changes. AD ALTA: Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, 13(2), 82-89.
  30. Shumilova, І. (2021). Projecting of the guidance teaching technologies of future educational managers. Scientific Notes of BSPU, 1, 375-384. doi: 10.31494/2412-9208-2021-1-1-375-384.
  31. Spillane, J.P. (2006). Distributed leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  32. Sposato, M. (2025). Opinion: Work should evolve to the benefit of society under AI changes. Retrieved from https://zuscholars.zu.ac.ae/works/7095.
  33. Starratt, R.J. (2004). Ethical leadership. Hoboken: Wiley.
  34. Swissuniversities. (2024). Annual report 2024. Retrieved from https://www.swissuniversities.ch/en/organisation/documentation/annual-report-2024.
  35. Talib, S., Alias, B.S., Matore, M.E.E.M., & Abdullah, A.H. (2025). Empowering STEM education through the role of principals: A systematic literature review. Journal of Education and Learning, 19(1), 570-578. doi: 10.11591/edulearn.v19i1.21889.
  36. ten Bruggencate, G., Luyten, H., Scheerens, J., & Sleegers, P. (2012). Modeling the influence of school leaders on student achievement: How can school leaders make a difference? Educational Administration Quarterly, 48(4), 699-732. doi: 10.1177/0013161X11436272.
  37. UNESCO. (2024). Leadership in education: Lead for learning. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. doi: 10.54676/ZNLI9227.
  38. Worthington, R.L., & Whittaker, T.A. (2006). Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices. The Counseling Psychologist, 34(6), 806-838. doi: 10.1177/0011000006288127.
  39. Yukl, G. (2023). Leadership in public administration. Journal of Government Studies, 20, 320-335.