Purpose This paper examines how Ukrainian school principals exercised leadership during the full-scale Russian-Ukrainian war focusing on the dynamic interplay of adaptive, transactional, and transformational approaches. The aim is to highlight how different leadership styles emerged across distinct phases of the crisis – Emergency, Stabilization and Recovery and Transformation – and how these enabled schools to maintain continuity while advancing long-term reform «New Ukrainian School» (NUS). Design/methodology/approach The study is based on a qualitative and quantitative secondary analysis of multiple data sources, encompassing government policy documents and nationwide monitoring data, which included survey findings from two annual waves (2023 and 2024) and seven focus group interviews with 47 principals. Data were thematically distributed according to leadership practices and mapped onto three temporal phases of the war: Emergency, Stabilization and Recovery and Transformation. Findings Results show that Ukrainian principals changed their leadership styles dynamically to shifting conditions. Adaptive leadership dominated the emergency phase through improvisation and rapid problem-solving. Transactional leadership gained prominence during the stabilization phase, marked by standardized routines, compliance mechanisms, and institutional order. Transformational leadership re-emerged in the recovery phase, as principals and policymakers sustained reform, invested in professional learning, and articulated a future-oriented vision despite ongoing conflict. Practical implications The findings provide actionable lessons for policymakers, international agencies, and school leaders operating in crisis-affected contexts. They demonstrate that leadership in emergencies cannot rely on a single leadership style but must integrate adaptive flexibility, transactional stability and transformational vision. Originality/value This research makes a dual contribution. Empirically, it analyzes how Ukrainian school leaders balanced immediate survival with systemic reform under extreme wartime conditions. Theoretically, it advances crisis leadership scholarship by illustrating the simultaneous and overlapping operation of adaptive, transactional and transformational leadership styles. The study highlights the need for an integrated framework that reflects the fluid and context-dependent nature of educational leadership in protracted crises.
Hrynevych et al. (Fri,) studied this question.