Analysis of Leadership Behavior Differences from Principles of Elementary School in Serangoon (Singapore) and Salatiga (Indonesia)

The purpose of this study is to analyze the differences in leadership behavior of elementary school principals in Singapore and Indonesia based on behavioral approaches. The research was conducted with a case study qualitative design. Data collection techniques were carried out by using questionnaires and literature studies. The data were then analyzed by using inductive analysis techniques. The results of this study found differences in leadership behavior between principals in Singapore and Indonesia, where principals in Singapore led to the Team Management type of leadership behavior (9.9), while school principals in Indonesia led to the Authority-Compliance Management type of leadership behavior (9, 9). 1). This study then provides a study of the impact of each type of leadership behavior on school success. It is hoped that this study can be useful for school principals to be able to apply the type of leadership behavior of Team Management (9.9) which leads to optimization of educational attainment.


INTRODUCTION
Education has an important role in nation building, especially in terms of human resource development. Good human resources will produce a nation of integrity and character, able to overcome all challenges and changes in life as is the essence of the implementation of educational success (Toharudin & Ghufroni, 2019). In fact, based on the International Assessment score, it shows that education in Indonesia is ranked 71 out of 77 countries. This shows that the quality of education in Indonesia ranks 7th in the bottom, compared to Indonesia's neighboring country, namely Singapore, which ranks 2nd (Octavia, 2016). This condition means that the quality of education in Indonesia is still very low. This problem requires educational institutions to be able to carry out the function of education management properly in order to be able to overcome these problems (Fitoh, 2017). One solution that is needed is the existence of good leadership from the principal as a leader of educational institutions at the school level (Pratama et al., 2020). Robbin (Rohmat, 2010) suggests that leadership is the ability to influence a group towards achieving goals. Leadership is needed to encourage a group towards achieving goals, as well as leadership from the principal (Nawawi et al., 2012;Abidin, 2021). The principal's leadership in management in the right school will lead to the achievement of educational goals, but vice versa (Gurr, 2015). It is important for school principals to develop their ability to implement leadership styles (Tua et al., 2017). Principal leadership is very important for improving the performance of educators and student learning outcomes (Suryani, 2021).This condition brings urgency to the implementation of leadership behavior that leads to the optimization of educational attainment. Northouse (2011) states that leadership behavior is the study of leader behavior, especially in what leaders do and how they act. Leadership behavior basically consists of two general types of behavior, namely task behavior and relationship behavior. Task behavior is related to how the leader facilitates the achievement of goals, while relationship behavior is related to how the leader is able to create a comfortable work environment (Casimir, 2014). The main purpose of the behavioral approach is to explain how leaders combine these two types of behavior to influence followers in their efforts to achieve a goal (Iguisi, 2014). The problem that occurs is that there are cases of low positive influence of leaders in achieving organizational goals (Abidin, 2021).
Leadership behavior is categorized into several types including: 1) Authority-Compliance Management (9.1). Leaders with type 9.1 are often seen as controlling, demanding, having little contact with members, being indifferent, uncommitted, and apathetic; 2) Country Club Management (1.9), the type of behavior 1.9 represents the principal with low attention to task completion but high attention to interpersonal relationships; 3) Impoverished Management (1.1), the type of behavior 1.1 represents a leader who does not care about tasks and interpersonal relationships; 4) Middle-of-the-Road Management (5.5), the behavior type 5.5 describes a compromising leader, who has moderate concern for tasks and moderate concern for people doing the task. This type of leader is often described as wise, preferring the middle way, and swallowing faith for the sake of "progress"; 5) Team Management (9.9), behavior type 9.9 places a strong emphasis on tasks and interpersonal relationships.
Leaders 9,9 stimulate participation, act decisively, express problems openly, make priorities clear, behave openly, and enjoy working; 6) Paternalism/ Maternalism, paternalism/ maternalism refers to a leader who uses styles 1,9 and 9,1 but does not integrate the two. Paternalistic/maternalistic leaders are often described as "fatherly" or "motherly" towards their followers; regard the organization as a "family"; make most of the important decisions; and reward loyalty and obedience while punishing disobedience; 7) Opportunism, Opportunism refers to a leader who uses a combination of the five basic styles for the purpose of personal advancement. An opportunistic leader will adapt and change his leadership behavior for personal gain, placing personal interests above other priorities (Northouse, 2011). Drysdale (2016), describes how four principals in Singapore have implemented Team Management (9.9) leadership behaviors which are practically realized through 6E (Educate, Envision, Energize, Engage, Enable, and Embrace), thus contributing significantly to the success of the school. These results, as stated by (Wang, 2010), principals are very successful in increasing school capacity through these leadership behaviors. Littrell (Littrell, 2013) asserts this success because the behavioral approach makes several positive contributions to the leadership process, such as: 1) The focus of leadership is no longer on the personal characteristics of leaders but includes what leaders do and how they act; 2) There are various approaches to understanding the leadership process; 3) The type of a leader consists of two types, namely tasks and relationships; and 4) Leaders can assess their actions and determine how they would like to change to improve leadership behavior.
The importance of the role of leadership behavior makes researchers feel the need to conduct research with a research focus, namely Analysis of Leadership Behavior Differences From Principles of Elementary School in Serangoon (Singapore) and Salatiga (Indonesia). This study tries to examine how the principal's leadership from the point of view of tasks and interpersonal relationships comprehensively. This is deemed necessary because the discussion of leader orientation towards tasks and interpersonal relationships has not been studied by previous researchers. It is hoped that this research will provide information for stakeholders on how leadership behavior in Singapore can lead to educational success, and otherwise with leadership in Indonesia.

RESEARCH METHOD
This study uses a qualitative research design with a case study approach. The research was carried out in two stages, namely stage 1 which was held in Salatiga (Indonesia) on 8-12 November 2021 and stage 2 which focused on studying the leadership of school principals in Serangoon (Singapore) on 15-20 November 2021. Research technique was carried out through literature review and questionnaireassisted interviews to analyze the type of leadership behavior in each school. Participants in this study were 8 principals and 40 teachers in Serangoon (Singapore) and Salatiga (Indonesia). Data were analyzed using inductive and thematic analysis techniques to identify, evaluate, and create themes expressed by participants (Creswell, 2013). This inductive technique allows the identification of themes that participants provide in response to research questions (Liu, 2011).

RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The results of research on leadership behavior obtained from literature review and interviews with participants are shown in table 1.

Table 1. Principal Leadership Behavior in Serangoon (Singapore) and Salatiga (Indonesia) Serangoon (Singapore) Salatiga (Indonesia)
The principal facilitates the improvement of teacher performance, enhances the professional capacity of teaching and non-teaching staff through professional development programs and the development of future leaders. Principals also forge meaningful partnerships with stakeholders inside and outside the school community.
The principal instructs the teacher with several tasks from the program that has been prepared, giving instructions directly without any previous discussion process so that teachers complain that they do not feel they understand their duties and cause various perceptions in its implementation. Principals actively seek to seek training information to facilitate teacher performance improvement, but the opportunity to participate in these activities is given mainly to certain teachers.
Starting from the results of the analysis of leadership behavior, it is known that theoretically leadership in Singapore has the type of leadership behavior Team Management (9.9), which represents task-oriented leaders and interpersonal relationships by stimulating participation, acting decisively, expressing problems openly, making priorities clear, behave openly, and enjoy working (Northouse, 2011). The behavior of facilitating the improvement of teacher performance, increasing the professional capacity of teaching and non-teaching staff through professional development programs and developing future leaders, establishing meaningful partnerships with stakeholders inside and outside the school community shows a form of emphasis on assignments and interpersonal relationships carried out principal. Further studies of principals in Singapore pay attention to the educational success of students and schools, establish and plan targets, support the professional development of each educator and staff, build relationships with stakeholders, be open to criticism and suggestions, which are overall built in school culture, behavior This is practically realized through 6E namely Educate, Envision, Energize, Engage, Enable, and Embrace as stated by Drysdale (2016) and the results are that Such leadership behavior contributes significantly to school success. The principal was very successful in increasing the school's capacity through this leadership behavior (Wang, 2010).
Furthermore, regarding leadership behavior in Indonesia, the results of the analysis show that school principals are enthusiastic in carrying out their work through several tasks from programs that have been prepared and actively seek training information to facilitate teacher performance improvement, this behavior is a form of embodiment of taskoriented behavior. Furthermore, there is behavior in giving instructions directly to teachers without any previous discussion process so that teachers complain that they do not feel they understand their duties and give rise to various perceptions in their implementation, as well as providing opportunities to participate in performance development activities given especially to certain teachers giving a form of lack orientation on interpersonal relationships, which is then theoretically categorized in the type of leadership behavior Authority-Compliance Management (9.1), as stated by Northouse (2011) the type of leadership behavior Authority-Compliance Management (9.1) emphasizes tasks and job requirements, and less emphasizes on relationships with members, unless members are tools to get the job done. Communicating with members is not emphasized except for the purpose of providing instructions on assignments. This lack of communication and cooperation is one of the indicators of the low leadership efforts of the principal in building interpersonal relationships among its members which causes a nonconducive working atmosphere for teachers, the implementation of an even distribution of tasks, and the absence of good cooperation in implementation.
Looking at the comparison of the types of leadership behaviors that tend to be applied in Singapore and Indonesia and how they affect them, the researchers found that the Team Management type of leadership behavior (9.9) facilitates the optimization of educational success in schools compared to the Authority-Compliance Management type (9.1) which in its implementation causes the low relationship between supporting personnel in schools and further causes problems in the implementation of tasks that also become obstacles to the success of education in schools. Researchers get the perception that these obstacles can be attempted to be overcome by implementing leadership behavior towards the Team Management type (9.9), as implemented by the Principal in Singapore. But changing the type of leadership behavior is not as easy as just saying it. There needs to be media or activities carried out to facilitate this. Changes in behavior can be bridged by having regular meetings or deliberation on a regular basis to foster relationships between principals and teachers. Teachers can submit complaints and constructive criticism to the principal in the meeting activities. Furthermore, the principal should be open to complaints and criticisms submitted as an incentive for evaluation to be better. This step as stated by Maduratna (2013) is important to hold meetings or discuss every school activity so that harmonious cooperation can be established between the principal and the teacher.
The analysis of differences in the leadership behavior of principals in Singapore and Indonesia provides a pattern that basically different types of leadership behavior contribute to different outcomes. It is expected that the principal is able to lead to the type of leadership behavior that brings results in optimizing educational attainment, supported by the role of all school members in its implementation. The next finding is that the depth of the study on the implementation of leadership behavior is felt to be a limitation in this study because of the obstacles to direct observations to schools due to limited mobility during the Covid 19 pandemic. So it is hoped that further researchers can examine more comprehensively how the application of leadership behavior in Singapore can support the success of education and is appropriate if applied in Indonesia.

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
The difference in leadership behavior between principals in Singapore and Indonesia is that principals in Singapore lead to the Team Management type of leadership behavior (9.9), while school principals in Indonesia lead to the Authority-Compliance Management type of leadership behavior (9.1). The type of leadership behavior Team Management (9.9) facilitated the optimization of educational success in schools, compared to the Type of Authority-Compliance Management (9.1) which in its implementation led to a low relationship between support staff in schools and subsequently caused problems in carrying out tasks which also became a problem. It is expected that the principal is able to lead to the type of leadership behavior that leads to the optimization of educational attainment such as leadership behavior Team Management (9.9)