Competency of School Principals in Managing Change in Malaysian Secondary Schools: Teachers’ Perspective

The increasing demands for school reform continuously challenge the roles of school leaders as change agents in the process of school change. Today, school leadership is not task driven per se but emotionally compelling. The aim of the study was to identify the level of competency in managing change (CIMC) of school principals in Malaysian secondary schools. Analysis of the survey was performed based on the data of 901 teachers. The findings revealed that, i) school principals were rated as Quite Good in CIMC; ii) in terms of dimensions, school principals were reported Quite Good both in Technical and Non-technical Competency; iii) in terms of sub-dimensions of CIMC, the school principals were rated as Good in Goal Framing, Institutionalizing, Emotional Utilization and Emotional Regulation but Quite Good in Capacity Building, Defusing Resistance and Conflicts, Emotional Perceiving and Expressing as well as Emotional Understanding; and iv) among all the sub-dimensions of CIMC, the school principals obtained the highest mean score in Goal Framing and achieved the lowest mean score in Defusing Resistance and Conflicts. The study offers the Ministry of Education, local practitioners and relevant parties another dimension of enhancing and enlarging school principals’ capacity for change.


Introduction
Education landscape is shifting rapidly due to the global dynamics and the advancement of technology. In line with this, many countries have embarked on educational reforms to improve student learning outcomes as education is at the heart of preparing present and future generations to thrive in the competitive world (Mohamed, Valcke & De Wever, 2017). However, most of the reform efforts have fallen short of expectations (Balogun & Hope-Hailey, 2004) or remained elusive move in that direction. In other words, by creating and achieving a vision, leadership therefore is viewed as a process links with change.
Early in the year 1985, Bennis and Nanus (1985) emphasize that, 'Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things'. This matched with what Kotter (1990) highlights that "management is about coping with complexity; leadership, by contrast, is coping with change" (p. 86). Arguing the same point, Elliott (1992) points out that without change no leadership had occurred. Further, Kerfoot (1999) claims that leadership is the art and science of leading change effectively. In the same vein, Yukl (2002) stress that leading change is the basic role of a leader and other task is secondary. In summary, leadership is a dynamic process that the leader(s) and followers interact in a way that they can create and drive change and brings the organization to the next level and thus leadership links inexorably to the management of change.
As change is evidently a crucial facet of leadership and inducing change and engaging others to change are central to leadership, leaders require the wisdom to recognize the urgency for change and equally important the ability to manage change. As such, it is essential for leaders to possess specific change leadership competency to deal and cope with the dynamics within or outside the organization during the change. Leadership competencies are seen as the knowledge, skills, abilities, and attributes possess by the leaders so that they can perform their tasks and roles excellently (Tai & Omar, 2018a). It is important to note that by conceptualizing leadership in terms of competency indicates that leadership can be learned and taught (Intagliata, Ulrich, & Smallwood, 2000). Succinctly, by gaining and practising new knowledge, skills and ability individuals can become more effective leaders.
On the other hand, competencies can be divided into technical and non-technical (Rothwell, Hohne & King, 2007). During a change process, technical competencies are specific to certain role to cope with the change whereas non-technical competencies such as emotional intelligence (EI) are core competencies that can be applied across the complete terrain of the process of change (Tai & Omar, 2013). Leader with either technical or non-technical competencies is insufficient for effective change leadership (Omar & Tai, 2018). Indeed, the increasing demands for accountability and organizational effectiveness constantly challenge both competencies to be complemented with each other that enable leaders to best lead change in the organization.
With the increasing demands for educational excellence schools are subject to frequent largescale reforms. Today, the role of the school leaders is challenging and complex specifically in the pathway to improve school effectiveness that links closely to student achievement. School is a dynamic and complex organization whereby school leadership is embedded in broader social relationships; it involves rational and cognitive activities as well as emotional engagement and unconscious dynamics. However, in comparison with technical competency, Spillane, Halverson and Diamond (2001) argue that non-technical competency such as EI is often overlooked when assessing the impact of leadership and school change although it is viewed as a significant component in education. Beatty (2000) and Patti et al (2015) point out that it is important not to disregard EI if the intended outcomes were school improvement and effectiveness through successful leadership.
To frame the above insights, it can be summarized that leadership, change and competency have a distinct relationship. Basically, change calls for leadership and leadership requires certain competencies if it is to be effective in driving change. Change can only be realized and sustained continually if leaders are equip with technical and non-technical competencies so that they are able to engage both intellectually and emotionally in the process of change. Therefore, by conceptualizing leadership in a change context based on critical technical and non-technical competencies, leadership development not only can be more comprehensively understood, it can be fine-tuned for greater potential contribution to any organizational change.

The Conceptual Framework of the Study
The study was confined to one main variable i.e. competency in managing change (CIMC) of school principals in Malaysian secondary school. As school leadership influence is manifested through the competencies of the leaders during the change process, CIMC is seen as central to the leadership process in school change. As shown in Figure 1, the CIMC is broadly divided into two dimensions, the Technical Competency and the Non-technical Competency. Technical Competency refers to the specific competency needed by school leaders to lead and drive school change effectively based on the different phases of change. It consists of four sub-dimensions: Goal Framing, Capacity Building, Defusing Resistance and Conflicts, and Institutionalizing. Goal Framing is the first phase in the strategic planning of any school change to identify the purpose and direction of the change. The change goal should be well-formulated and clear so as to give the staff the feeling that the school is implementing an important task. To realize the change goal, three important steps have been outlined for this phase of change: i) developing an achievable goal for the school; ii) presenting the main reasons for change; and iii) having a clear roadmap of how to realize the change goal (Tai, Omar & Ghouri, 2018 Capacity Building is the second phase of the school change process (Tai et al., 2018). Before the change starts, it is essential for school principals to examine the readiness of the teachers whether they posses sufficient competence to meet change requirements. Based on the results of the assessment, training programs need to put in place to establish teachers' capacity. Teachers' capacity building will enhance teachers' efficacy to carry out the new task efficiently. No teacher will embrace any school change if they are not ready to do so or not competent to conduct the new task (Tai et al., 2018). This phase of school change includes three functions: i) seeking ways to develop the competencies of the staff in teaching and learning; ii) providing the staff with training in coaching; and iii) Enabling the staff to perform the new task (Tai et al., 2018).
Defusing Resistance and Conflict is the third phase of the change (Tai et al., 2018). The heart of any school reform is the buy-in of the teachers to work through the change process because they are the change implementers closest to the students. However, as change is a stressor, people normally do not like change (Kotter, 1999;Hayes, 2010). Consequently, teachers may manifest a variety of actions to resist change. Additionally, it is very common that conflicts will exist among teachers in the change process; conflicts that will jeopardize change efforts as well as change outcomes. The associated significant competencies for school principals in handling Defusing Resistance and Conflict include i) anticipating the resistance behaviors that threaten the change initiatives; ii) making individuals who resist change feel ease and confident; and iii) managing change conflict effectively by seeking consensus from each party (Tai et al., 2018).
Institutionalizing is the last phase of the school change (Tai et al., 2018). After concerted efforts have been taken to make change happens, it is important to sustain the achievements of the change or make the change permanent by moving fitting it into organization's culture and practices or else the members of the organization probably will slip back into the old ways of working (Lewin, 1958;Kotter, 1999;Nilakant & Ramanarayan, 2006;Hayes, 2010). As change is all too often shortlived, to ensure the process of continuous improvement and institutionalizing, school principals need to take three important steps in this phase of change: i) analyzing objectively the final change outcomes; ii) creating chances for the department for sharing best practices; and iii) ensuring staff members continually contribute to changes that were made (Tai et al., 2018).
The Non-technical Competency refers to those interpersonal and adaptive competencies in which the school leaders conduct themselves and interact with the working environment that makes human work more efficient. Importantly, it complements and supports those technical competencies making them more effective in leading change in schools. Specifically in this study, the Non-technical Competency refers to the EI of school leaders in leading change whereby their cognitive competence are informed by emotions and their emotions are managed cognitively. It encompasses four subdimensions: Emotional Perceiving and Expressing, Emotional Utilization, Emotional Understanding and Emotional Regulation (Tai et al., 2018).
Emotional Perceiving and Expressing is defined as the ability of school principal to perceive, differentiate and express emotions in the self and others. The ability to perceive a person's emotions (type and intensity) accurately facilitates the understanding of that person's subsequent behaviors whereas expressing emotions accurately to others enable school principals to address emotional issues to the right person in the right time and place (Tai & Omar, 2018b). Emotional Utilization is conceptualized as the ability of school principal to harness oneself and others' emotions in order to facilitate cognitive activities, for examples, thinking, judgement and problem solving, leading to effective performance. The capability to integrate the experience of emotion into positive cognitive activities is critical in handling of complex problems in the change process. This capability will help school principals to settle arguments, defuse resistance and change conflicts and turn change goals into reality (Tai & Omar, 2018b).
Emotional Understanding is conceptualized as the school principal's ability to understand the relationships among different emotions, the causes and the consequences, the complex feelings and transitions among emotions in self and others. Building self-awareness about one's own emotions and feelings will enable individuals to understand other better; understanding the emotions of others will lead to the creation of the primacy of secure relationships among the staff that would be more likely to engage them to change (Tai et al., 2018). Emotional Regulation is viewed as the school principal's adaptive ability to reduce, prevent, modify or enhance an emotional response in oneself and others to achieve desired goals. It is essential for maintaining good relationships in the organization and provides a basis for enhancing job satisfaction (Sy, Tram & O'Hara, 2006;Wong & Law, 2002). It is essential for school principals to recognize that accurately regulating emotions is one of the effective ways that can lead to the achievement of the intended change goals.

Methodology Sample
To gain a better perspective, the study involved all the 16 states/federal territories in Malaysia. For every state/federal territory, five secondary schools were selected randomly or a total of 80 schools (16 x 5) were involved in the study. In each school, fifteen teachers who have been teaching at least one year were chosen randomly as respondents. Simply put, a total number of 1,200 teachers (80 x 15) were selected for the survey (Table 1).  (Fornell & Larker, 1981), with a range of 59% to 75% that held convergent validity. The CIMCS also provided evidence for discriminant validity as the AVEs of the factors were higher than 0.50 and the CR index surpassed 0.70 (Hair, et al., 2010). The CIMCS is a sixpoint Likert scale. The data interpretation of this study is based on two main indicators, the frequency of the performance and the performance rating of satisfactory-dissatisfactory as shown in Table 2. Table 2. Raw scores of CIMC and its level and indicators

Data Analysis
As shown in Table 1, of all the questionnaires sent out via post, 937 of 1,200 questionnaires were returned by teachers, representing a response rate of 78.08%. However, only 901 questionnaires of the teachers were accepted for the final analysis, as some of the questionnaires were deemed incomplete or had at least 25% illegible responses. The above data collection adhere all ethical consideration. The study employed descriptive statistical analysis whereby data was analyzed based on mean scores and percentages. Table 3 shows the breakdown of demographic variables of the respondents. Besides, based on the .05 significance level, the t-test was also conducted to examine the difference between the variables.  Table 3. Demographic characteristics of the respondents

Findings
As shown in Figure 2, the mean score of CIMC of school principals was 4.98. Based on the raw scores and the level of CIMC displayed in Table 2, the teachers rated their school principals as Quite Good in CIMC as the mean scores fell within 4.01 to 5.00. In terms of dimension, Figure 1 revealed that the level of Technical Competency and Non-technical Competency also achieved the level of Quite Good as the mean scores were 4.99 and 4.97, respectively. Although a difference of 0.02 was observed between these two mean scores but the difference was not significant, t=.705, df=1800, p>.05 (Table  4). In summary, a) as a whole, the school principals were rated as Quite Good in CIMC; b) both Technical Competency and Non-technical Competency of school principals also at the level of Quite Good and there was no significant difference between these two competencies; c) in terms of subdimensions of CIMC, the school principals were rated as Good in Goal Framing, Institutionalizing, Emotional Utilization and Emotional Regulation but Quite Good in Capacity Building, Defusing Resistance and Conflicts, Emotional Perceiving and Expressing as well as Emotional Understanding; and d) among all the sub-dimensions of CIMC, the school principals obtained the highest mean score in Goal Framing and achieved the lowest mean score in Defusing Resistance and Conflicts.

Discussion
Based on the findings above, few significant insights have gleaned from the study. Firstly, as a whole, the school principals achieved the level of Quite Good in CIMC. Based on the raw scores and the level of CIMC suggested in the study, this revealed that the school principals only had demonstrated CIMC 'quite often' with 'quite satisfied' performance. This implied that the level of practising CIMC of the school principals in Malaysian secondary schools is yet to be enhanced. To best lead change in the schools, it is essential for the school principals to 'often' practise CIMC with 'satisfied' performance instead of 'quite often' in terms of frequency with 'quite satisfied' performance. As mentioned earlier, only school leaders equip with concerned change leadership competencies are able to drive and transform the schools effectively.
Contributory factors to the above phenomenon may include the preparation and development program for school leaders that affect the concerned leadership practice and behaviour (Mitgang, 2012;Tai & Omar, 2018a). Indeed in the year 2009, Institut Aminuddin Baki (IAB) ---the national institute of educational management and leadership of the Ministry of Education Malaysia (MOE) had employed a training need analysis study among the school leaders in Malaysia. The results revealed that managing change is the most needed competency (M=3.85) among the eight critical competencies identified by the school principals in driving school effectiveness (Rosnarizah, Amin & Razak, 2009). Since then, to ensure school leaders are able to manage school change effectively, change management has been introduced as an important component for school leaders' professional development courses in Malaysia.  For example, change management has become one of the important modules for the National Professional Qualification for Educational Leaders (NPQEL) program, the mandatory preparatory training program for all new school principals in Malaysia (IAB, 2015;IAB, 2016;IAB, 2017). It is also an important tenet for the Program Residency and Immersion or PRIme ---another leadership development program for those soon-to-be appointed principals (IAB, 2015;IAB, 2016;IAB, 2017). Besides, change management is part of the important content for the School Transformation Program 2025 that had launched in 2015 by MOE with the aim for school improvement and effectiveness (Ministry of Education, 2017).
Although emphasis has been given to improve, the competency of managing change of school leaders in different professional development and CPD programs, whether it is effective depends on several important related factors. For instance, instead of a single approach, the effectiveness of the professional development and CPD programs can be realized through a balanced and comprehensive approach (Michaelidou & Pashiardis 2009;Petridou, Nocolaidou & Karagiorgi, 2017;Tai & Omar, 2018a). Specifically, in maximizing learning impacts, different pathways of professional development with multi-phase designs and modularization of the program should be applied in achieving the purpose (Tai & Omar, 2018c). According to Hoestra, Beijaard, Brekelmans and Korthagen (2009), Opfer and Pedder (2011), the content of professional development and CPD program should able to help school leaders to address affective, cognitive, behavioural and motivational aspects in schools as real change can only occur while all of the mentioned aspects are addressed effectively.
Other factor might due to the disconnection between theory and practice. High-quality professional development and CPD program need to ensure that there is a more applied and experiential form of learning that is job-embedded, where school leaders can connect theory, practice and student outcomes for continuous school improvement (Goldring, Preston & Huff, 2010; Nicolaidou and Petridou 2011); instead of acquiring more knowledge, the program' emphasis is more about making sense of the current knowledge, hence developing reflective skills as a way of exploring and reforming practice (Dempster, Lovett & Fluckiger, 2011;Huber 2008;Tai & Omar, 2018c); the various program offer to school leaders should be customized as they vary in their needs at different school contexts and school developmental stages, as well as at different points in their careers (Tai & Omar, 2018a). This is particularly true with professional development program that apply a one-sizefits-all approach (Joyce & Calhoun, 2010).
Secondly, the finding showed that both Technical Competency and Non-technical Competency of school principals also at the level of Quite Good and there was no significant difference between these two competencies. This implied that there is room for improvement for school principals to enhance both Technical Competency and Non-technical Competency in near future if it is to be effective to drive school change effectively and ultimately to realize the change goals. Besides, the finding also revealed that equal emphasis had been given by IAB to both Technical Competency and Non-technical Competency during the professional development and CPD program and the school leaders also learnt and applied both the concerned competencies in the process of managing school change. In fact, as school is a complex organization school leadership needs to be embedded in a broader social relationship. School change can only be successfully implemented if school leaders involve themselves in rational and cognitive activities as well as emotional engagement that have direct demands on school leaders' cognition, affective, behavioural and motivation states (Opfer & Pedder, 2011).
Thirdly, a close examination in terms of the sub-dimensions of CIMC revealed the school principals were rated as Good in Goal Framing, Institutionalizing, Emotional Utilization and Emotional Regulation. The school principals were rated as Good in Goal Framing implied that they 'often' practise Goal Framing with 'satisfied' performance i.e. they were always able to develop achievable change goals for the school; to present the reasons why they wanted to have change; and to have a clear direction of how to achieve the change goals effectively. The likelihood of school principals in engaging teachers to the change would be relatively high if they often practise Goal Framing as it is a vital initial step in implementing any school change (Tai & Omar, 2018a).
The school principals were rated as Good in Institutionalizing implied that they 'often' practised and had given emphasis to the importance of sustaining the outcomes of the change with 'satisfied' performance. To this end, they were always able to analyse whether the change was implemented as what they had planned and whether the implemented change was having the intended impacts; opportunities were always being created for departments in sharing best practices and made sure that the new ways of working and the concerned achievements became the norms for the whole school; they always able to ensure that teachers continually contribute to the changes made, for instance, to develop a mechanism to align or refine the new state continually (Tai & Omar, 2018a).
The school principals were rated as Good in Emotional Utilization implied that they had 'often' displayed Emotional Utilization with 'satisfied' performance. School principals were rated as Good in this component indicated that they were always able to use emotion in directing and focusing their attention on pressing concerns and situations; in adopting a better emotional state in choosing among alternatives and solving problems; to use emotion in facilitating cognitive processes; and to use shifts in emotions to promote flexibility. In short, school principals were always able to use Emotional Utilization to cope with disagreement, defuse resistance or conflicts in the change process (Tai & Omar, 2018b).
The school principals were also rated as Good in Emotional Regulation. School principals were rated as Good in Emotional Regulation implied that they had 'often' displayed Emotional Regulation with 'satisfied' performance. They were always able to reflectively monitor and manage the positive as well as the negative emotions of self and others. Additionally, they were always knew how to respond effectively to an emotional experience in both self and others by employing effective alternative behaviors to produce the intended outcome in the change process. School change is inherently emotional and produces a range of feelings and emotions in individuals (Tai & Omar, 2018b). School principals need to use a variety of emotional regulation strategies and apply it to different situations as the enhancement of the principal-teacher relationship contributes to workplace outcomes and organizational productivity.
On the other hand, it was found that school principals were perceived as Quite Good in Capacity Building, Defusing Resistance and Conflicts, Emotional Perceiving and Expressing as well as Emotional Understanding. The school principals were rated as Quite Good in Capacity Building implied that they only had demonstrated the competency of Capacity Building 'quite often' with 'quite satisfied' performance. Capacity Building focuses on how school principals develop the capacity of the staff to face the challenges of the change, enhance their efficacy to work through the change process and ensuring their performance meet the required quality of the change (Tai & Omar, 2018a). These included the school principals 'quite often' taking the initiatives to develop the competence of the staff in teaching and learning; providing the staff with training in coaching; and enable the staff to perform the new task effectively (Tai & Omar, 2018a). As deficiency in staff's capacity will slow down the change, hence school principals need to enhance their competency in Capacity Building so as to enhance the school's readiness and capacity to succeed in the change.
The school principals were also rated as Quite Good in Defusing Resistance and Conflicts. This implied that they were 'quite often' practiced the above behaviors with 'quite satisfied' performance in managing school change. In other words, they were quite often able to anticipate the resistance behaviours of the staff that threaten the change initiatives; to make individuals who refuse to accept the change feel ease and confident; and to defuse change conflicts by obtaining consensus from each party (Tai & Omar, 2018a) with quite good performance. Indeed, resistance to change is the main reason why organizational change efforts difficult to be obtained (Deloitte & Touche, 1996). As the school principals are still at the level of Quite Good for this competency therefore they need to improve it urgently as it is crucial to turn change goal into reality.
Meanwhile, the school principals were also rated as Quite Good in Emotional Perceiving and Expressing. School principals were rated as Quite Good in this component, indicated that they were 'quite often' able to identify and differentiate emotions accurately in their staff members through appearance, expression or behavior; to accurately express his or her feelings accurately and according to the needs of the staff when weathering the change with 'quite satisfied' performance. Both the above abilities of school principals enable them to facilitate the understanding of their staff and help them to address emotional issues to the staff accurately in the right time and place. As such, it is essential for school principals to enhance their ability in Emotional Perceiving and Expressing so that the school leaders able to avoid stereotyping that may lead to performance deficits in the school change when enacting change initiatives.
Besides, the school principals were also rated as Quite Good in Emotional Understanding. In other words, they had 'quite often' displayed Emotional Understanding with 'quite 'satisfied performance. This indicated that they were quite often able to understand how emotions evolve and change over time; the determinants of emotions; the complex feelings; the relationships among various emotions; and transitions among emotions (Tai & Omar, 2018b). Working in today's challenging people-intensive educational context, understanding the emotions of the staff has the potential to facilitate an effective school leadership in multiple ways that enable school leaders in the nurture and building up of a conducive emotional climate. As the school principal still at the level of Quite Good for this component, it is essential for them to enhance this competency adequately as it is crucial to improve organizational productivity in the face of change.
Fourthly, the finding also demonstrated that among all the sub-dimensions of CIMC, the school principals obtained the highest mean score in Goal Framing. This indicated that the ability and initiatives of school principals to develop attainable change goals, presenting the moral purpose of the change and having a clear roadmap of how to realize the change goals were the most sufficient in comparison with other sub-dimensions. As Malaysia is implementing a centralized rather than a decentralized school system, conformity is essential within the hierarchy of authority. As change agents as well as instructional leaders, school principals are at the center of the school change. They are responsible to initiate, implement, monitor and sustain any change kicks off by the MOE. In relation to this, they are expected to initiate the behaviors of Goal Framing successfully based on the vision set up by the MOE. They were always able to formulate the change goals based on the needs and the instructions from the MOE; communicate and articulate the change goals to the staff and various stakeholders; and identify alternatives to achieve the change goals. Therefore, this should not come as a surprise why the school principals obtained the highest mean score in Goal Framing.
Fifthly, the finding also revealed that among all the sub-dimensions of CIMC, the school principals obtained the lowest mean score in Defusing Resistance and Conflicts. Simply put, in comparison with other sub-dimensions, school principals demonstrated the least competence in this component. Indeed, to change the attitude of the staff from resisting to embracing the change is not an easy task; to gain the change recipients' minds and hearts is the most challenging endeavours in leading change in any organization. Fullan (1993) highlights that focusing on people is the most effective way to drive educational change; the organization will change when people within the organization adopt the change. If school principal fail to do so, negative emotions such as frustration, anger, resent, stresses, fear or anxiety will be generated in the organization, causing disconnect and unsuccessful implementation (Tai & Omar, 2018a). Therefore it is important to note that human factor is relatively a crucial factor that affects the change as any effective and sustainable change resides within the human system (Juechter, Caroline & Alford, 1998).

Limitations and future direction of the study
A few limitations should be noted in the current study. To gain a different perspective of the phenomenon and to enhance the capacity to interpret the findings, future research should be designed to collect the data from school principals, the change agent as well as another third party, the senior assistants. The current study is also limited by the approach of the research. As school change is a complex subject and is context-specific, instead of just conducting a survey study, it would be meaningful if future studies could allow for a longitudinal design to collect sufficient data within a longer time span. Lastly, the assumption made in the present study regarding the relationships between the contributory factors and the level of Quite Good in CIMC achieved by the school principals have to be examined further by using the concerned instruments to identify the extent of the impact of the factors upon CIMC. This certainly will advance our understanding of the phenomena greatly.

Conclusion
Change is an important facet of leadership. To drive school change effectively, it is essential for school leaders to equip with subsequent change leadership competencies, both technical and non-technical. As school leadership is not task driven per se but emotionally compelling, school change can only be realized and sustained continually if school principals are able to engage both intellectually and emotionally in the process of change. In summary, school principals in Malaysia achieved the level of Quite Good in CIMC implied that there is room for improvement to enhance their CIMC to meet the requirements as change agents to initiate school reforms effectively as outlined in the Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025. Although MOE had given equal attention to develop both technical and non-technical competencies of school principals in managing change, concerted efforts need to be taken by MOE to identify the root cause why the school principals were still at the level of Quite Good in CIMC.
In summary, this study provides a preliminary insight into emerging patterns and typology of CIMC in Malaysian secondary schools. Specifically, it provides the MOE with useful feedback in designing change management training program based on the distinct needs of school leaders; resources can be targeted more accurately so that school leaders can be equipped with essential CIMC and able to bring their schools to a transformational edge. The study also offers local practitioners and relevant parties yet another dimension of enhancing and enlarging school principals' capacity for change. Additionally, the study contributes to the field of educational change management particularly in advancing a more comprehensive analysis in exploring CIMC towards continuous school improvement and may help move the literature of school change management to a more coherent theoretical perspective.