Home > Implementation for Educators Blog
Leadership for Implementation: Why Leading Change Requires More Than a Vision
Implementation leadership isn’t a single theory because effective implementation leaders must adapt their approach to the people, context, stage of implementation, and challenges facing the work.
I thought leadership was leadership.
When I first learned about the theories and concepts of implementation science, I served as the Executive Director of Instructional Services at a K-12 regional agency in Michigan. The agency was participating in the Michigan Department of Education Transformation Zone project, focusing on Multi-tiered Systems of Support (MTSS). At the time, my agency supported three local school districts in implementing MTSS using the Active Implementation Frameworks. The project lasted three years with intensive support, then about a year with targeted support for the districts. Although this work began about a decade ago, I still reflect on the experience and wonder what the regional agency and the districts we supported sustained, and, most importantly, why.
Effective implementation is still occurring in two of three districts in the region, and I believe leadership is one of the critical factors in sustaining it. The leadership in place has benefited from consistency, but also from leaders who understand support systems work. While the Implementation Drivers place leadership at the base of the triangle, indicating the foundation for systems work, I also wonder: what kind of leadership does it take to move an idea, initiative, or evidence-based practice into routine use?
There isn’t one theory of leadership that explains implementation.
Ron Heifetz’s work on adaptive leadership heavily influenced leadership as an implementation driver at NIRN. Heifetz et al. (2009) argue that leaders often mistake adaptive challenges for technical ones, leading to ineffective solutions. Heifetz defines technical challenges as easily identified and addressed, while adaptive challenges require a balcony view to understand perspectives and take longer to address. This focus, though valuable, leaves unanswered questions about NIRN’s leadership approach and the broader behaviors needed to navigate complex implementation climates.
Reviewing NIRN’s work on leadership, along with my own experiences, led me to dig into leadership theory and consider what it takes to be an implementation leader. For example, we can identify elements of strategic leadership when we want leaders to be proactive, knowledgeable about the innovation, supportive, and able to persevere through distractions and challenges (Aarons et al., 2014). But at the same time, I would also want a transformational leader. Someone who can inspire and motivate teams through a shared vision, creative problem-solving, and providing individual support (Corbin et al. 2024). Finally, could I also ask that leaders distribute implementation authority and decision-making? If leaders empower other administrators and staff to share decision-making authority, it creates the structural stability needed to sustain change in organizations and commitment to the practices being implemented (Locke et al., 2025). I mean, really, is it too much to ask for a superintendent, curriculum director, or principal to have all of these qualities?
Champions and leadership in effective implementation
Hopefully, you caught the sarcasm in that last sentence. The reality is that we shouldn’t expect one person to embody all the leadership qualities needed for effective implementation. Instead, we need a team-based approach, intentionally selecting individuals based on their roles, experience, representation, and, dare I say, leadership skills.
I was recently in a meeting where we were discussing the different roles individuals play in supporting implementation efforts. As part of that conversation, the role of the champion came up. At NIRN, we have resources dedicated to identifying and supporting champions, recognizing the important role these individuals play in building enthusiasm, generating buy-in, and helping move implementation efforts forward.
But the more I think about the term champion, the more I question whether it fully captures their contributions. Why don’t we simply call them implementation leaders?
When we think about leadership, we often default to those with formal titles or positional authority. Yet some of the most influential people in implementation efforts are not necessarily the ones making decisions or sitting at the top of an organizational chart. They build relationships, ask thoughtful questions, challenge the status quo, help colleagues navigate uncertainty, and create the conditions for others to engage in the work.
Is that not leadership?
Of course, enthusiasm for an initiative and leading implementation aren’t necessarily the same thing. A champion may generate excitement and advocate for a new practice, but implementation leadership goes further. It involves translating that enthusiasm into action, helping others understand not just what is changing, but why and how. It means recognizing barriers, connecting people and resources, using data to inform decisions, and taking shared responsibility for moving the work forward.
This is where I think we can broaden how we define and recognize leadership in implementation efforts.
When individuals step forward to serve on implementation teams, support colleagues, contribute to problem-solving, or strengthen the systems needed for change, they demonstrate leadership, regardless of their position in the organization. They may not have the authority to make every decision, but they can influence how implementation unfolds. And that influence matters.
So, I am curious: How would you define implementation leadership? What skills, behaviors, or actions do you demonstrate in your own implementation efforts that reflect leadership, regardless of whether your role is formal or informal?
You see, I was recently in a meeting where we had an in-depth conversation about formal versus informal leadership and how we define the difference. A colleague in the meeting asked whether we need the word ‘champion’ as a role, and whether we should be more intentional about recognizing, developing, and elevating these individuals as leaders, not just ‘champions’ of an initiative. After all, effective implementation requires more than people who believe in the work. It requires people who are willing and equipped to help make it happen.
The conversation made me think back to the work in Michigan during the MTSS Transformation Zone project. Those who were ‘champions’ were really informal leaders. maybe it’s time we recognized implementation leadership for what it is: something demonstrated through actions and influence, not defined by a title.
Additional Resources
References
Aarons, G. A., Ehrhart, M. G., & Farahnak, L. R. (2014). The implementation leadership scale (ILS): Development of a brief measure of unit-level implementation leadership. Implementation Science, 9(45). doi:10.1186/1748-5908-9-45
Corbin, C. M., Lyon, A. R., Collins, V. K., Ehrhart, M. G., Goosey, R., & Locke, J. (2024). The Incremental Association of Implementation Leadership and School Personnel Burnout Beyond Transformational Leadership. School Psychology, 39(3), 269–279. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000577
Heifetz, R. A., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Harvard Business Press.
Locke, J., Corbin, C. M., Goosey, R., Collins, V. K., Ehrhart, M. G., Hatch, K., Espeland, C., & Lyon, A. R. (2025). Not getting better but not getting worse: A cluster randomized controlled pilot trial of a leadership implementation strategy. Implementation Research and Practice, 6, 1–13. doi:10.1177/26334895241312405