Niccolò Machiavelli’s famous treatise on ruthless ruling is called Il Principe - the prince. But, one academic argues, it might equally have been called Il Principal.

Sophie Ward, lecturer in education at Durham University, believes that the current education system encourages headteachers to develop the qualities advocated by Machiavelli: ruthlessness, competitiveness and the appearance of virtue in place of virtue itself.

“Machiavelli is where we get the modern idea of the executive from, in education and in business,” she says. “It assumes that headteachers can act in a way that is morally flexible, without social and emotional toll.”

It is a theory that may divide opinion: it would be a rare headteacher who would immediately embrace the adjective “Machiavellian”.

But Dr Ward thinks that is how school leaders are expected to act today, with damaging consequences. Developing her theory, she studied contemporary business and school leadership texts, and spoke to 63 heads. She presented her findings at the annual British Educational Research Association conference, held earlier this month.

Machiavelli’s model requires leaders to be accountable: for their affairs to be open to public scrutiny. They must strive to be as successful as possible, while not being seen to do any wrong. Schools, Dr Ward argues, are open to such public scrutiny - and need for success - through the publication of league tables.

“What’s problematic about the Machiavellian model is that it’s all about winning,” Dr Ward says. “Your true beliefs don’t matter. It fosters a very shallow relationship.”

Matt Butler, South West regional director for Oasis academies, agrees that the accountability culture places considerable emphasis on winning. “Yes, there are league tables, he says. “And, yes, that does drive a level of focus on outcomes, a level of competition.”

Dr Ward highlights another, potentially controversial element of the Machiavellian model: it requires leaders to be answerable to their consumers.

“I think that’s a good thing,” Mr Butler says. “We’re listening to what parents and students want. If that’s Machiavellian, then fine.”

But, Nichola Smith, headteacher of Meadstead Primary Academy in Barnsley, South Yorkshire, fears that this focus on consumer-driven results can lead to Machiavellian single-mindedness.

“This is where a lot of heads have fallen down,” she says. “They’re held to so much scrutiny that they crack under pressure and forget what they came into education for.”

Malcolm Trobe, interim general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, agrees. He questions whether the Machiavellian model of leadership is in fact right for education.

“The key thing is that school leadership has to be principled,” he says. “People in education should be driven by a sense of moral purpose. You shouldn’t be drawn into just doing things for the school’s position in the league tables. Your principal aim is to ensure that you’re doing the best for the broad-based educational outcomes of young people.”

Outcomes above all else

Dr Ward thinks that Machiavellian, outcome-driven leadership takes an inevitable emotional toll on headteachers.

As a cautionary example, she cites Shakespeare’s Macbeth, a Machiavellian leader who pursues outcomes above all else. “He becomes king of Scotland,” she says. “But it completely implodes in the end. On a social and emotional level, it fails. It’s the same in education.

“Shakespeare sees Macbeth severing his relationships with everybody around him. He starts killing his friends. Obviously, that’s not going to happen in an educational context.”

But, she adds, headteachers who focus too much on success and achievement inevitably lose some of their humanity. As an example, she quotes Todd Whitaker, a headteacher-author whom she believes had lost sight of the purpose of education when he said: “You don’t have to like the students; you just have to act as if you like them.”

Your true beliefs don’t matter. It fosters a very shallow relationship

It is a warning that Mr Trobe echoes: “You do need to lead from a strong ethical or principled base. Because, if you’re not careful, you will be leading with your own self-interest at heart.”

Ms Smith argues that good school leadership is the opposite of self-interest. “For me, the thing that keeps me coming into school is the smile on the children’s faces when they catch a ball for the first time, or spell a word they’ve been struggling with,” she says. “Otherwise, why would you keep on going?”