Following Levinas leadership practices are first and foremost ethical and political in nature: consequently leadership education, for it to be congruent with its espoused subject, must be reconfigured to reflect this ethico-political nature. This reconfigured educative practice has a duty to disrupt, via antagonisms and conflict, the traditional apparatuses of education for instance, by relinquishing the conflict-stabilising classroom; developing more complex, more ethically and politically relevant notions of student and teacher subjectivities; challenging simple-minded accounts of automony and agency; reappraising models of interpretations of texts and their relations to various contexts – social, cultural, institutional, pedagogical; reassessing and developing, consequently, richer notions of Derridian reading and writing considered as social practices; dissembling the intimate connections between power and knowledge in, for instance, not only classroom settings but also constructions of educational policies and the development of new pedagogical practices; paying greater attention to the discursive power of the languages of business education – those of educational administration, economics, management, measurement, and policy – in the constitution of education in the broadest sense; utilising, in innovative ways, various forms of discourse analysis, deconstruction, archaeology, and genealogy as new means of analysis of educational institutions, practices, and policies; championing the notions and principles of becoming and process over questions of being and ontology in understanding educational practices; and critiquing binary modes of thinking per se.

Leave a Reply