Studies have shown that a commitment to any change, including curricular program, student policy, or educational innovation, is best obtained by involving those who are most affected by the change. Staff development and inservice education programs are longer-lasting and more positively received when the instructional staff are part of the planning, presentation, implementation, and evaluation. In a 10-year series of simulation exercises conducted to demonstrate the effects of leadership styles, a consistent preference was found for shared decisions on tasks. In addition, greater satisfaction with outcomes and with personal participation was reported from democratically-organized work groups. Acceptable performance and satisfaction was also obtained under laissez-faire leadership where the task was simply explained and then turned over to the participants. Under autocratic leaders, the task was often well done, but pride, satisfaction, and commitment were always lower than in the other two groups. The suggestion is made that a school could develop a cadre of autocratic leaders to handle crisis situations; democratic leaders to assume complex planning and cooperative ventures; and laissez-faire leaders for higher level, professional tasks. These leaders could be drawn from the professional cadre of regular teachers who have been trained in leadership development programs. (JD)