分布式領導自2000年起興起，挑戰傳統以個人特質為核心的領導模式，轉向強調協作、共享與集體責任。Gronn首創以社會分布活動理論視角解析領導，強調協同行動、共同活動、工具媒介。Spillane等人提出三種分布形式—協作式、集體式與協調式—以美國中小學為研究場域，指出領導實踐可由正式與非正式領導者共同帶領。Halverson主張「實踐為本」，強調人造物（如課綱、評量機制）在分布式領導中的關鍵角色。Wood等學者進一步發展出結構—能動性二元模型，Tian亦納入組織資源、社會文化與權力面向，探究不同文化脈絡下權力差異對領導實踐的影響。而Camburn、Hulpia、Hallinger、Leithwood等以量化方式探討正式領導者間的角色分工、協作決策與教學成效、教師承諾之關聯，界定分布式領導為一種規範性使用方式。最後，微觀政治觀點提醒我們，隱性權力與政治行為深刻影響分布式領導的落實，不同文化情境下教師與領導者互動呈現差異。綜合而言，分布式領導並非單一模式，而是一種多元理論範式，涵蓋領導者、追隨者、情境、人造物與權力互動的複雜過程。

Since the early 2000s, distributed leadership has emerged as a response to traditional leadership paradigms centered on individual traits. It emphasizes collaboration, shared responsibilities, and collective agency. Gronn introduced the perspective of distributed activities theory, highlighting conjoint action, concertive practices, and the role of mediating artifacts. Spillane and colleagues conceptualized three distributed forms– collaborated, collective, and coordinated– based on empirical research in U.S. schools, revealing how leadership practice is co-constructed dynamically by both formal and informal actors. Halverson emphasized a practice-based approach, focusing on the role of artifacts (e.g., curricula, assessments) in distributed leadership. Wood and others proposed a dual structure-agency model, while Tian incorporated organizational resources, socio-cultural dynamics, and power relations to examine how cultural contexts shape leadership enactment. In educational administration research, scholars such as Camburn, Hulpia, Hallinger, and Leithwood have adopted quantitative approaches to investigate role distribution, decision-making collaboration, and their effects on instructional outcomes and teacher commitment– conceptualizing distributed leadership as a normative strategy. Finally, from a micropolitical perspective, implicit power and political behaviors significantly influence the implementation of distributed leadership, with teacher-leader interactions varying across cultural settings. Overall, distributed leadership is not a single model but a multifaceted theoretical paradigm involving complex interactions among leaders, followers, context, artifacts, and power dynamics.