Research by Arguelles and Sarsale (2025) confirms what international education must not ignore. Their research from rural and remote Philippine schools exposes a critical gap in international education practice. A mixed-methods study of 218 school leaders reveals that institutions excel at stakeholder identification while failing at stakeholder integration. The finding has profound implications for how we understand narrative alignment in schools worldwide.
The study by Arguelles and Sarsale (2025), published in Issues in Educational Research, examined five dimensions of stakeholder engagement: identification, planning, engagement, management, and monitoring. Quantitative results show moderately high implementation across all areas, with mean scores ranging from 3.835 to 3.927 on a 5-point scale. Schools identify students, parents, teachers, alumni, and community members. They document processes. They allocate budgets. They appoint personnel to manage engagement activities.
The qualitative fracture
Yet qualitative findings from 11 semi-structured interviews reveal a different reality. Schools focus on retaining stakeholders but take insufficient action to improve communication, teamwork, and data-driven decision-making. The identification exists. The incorporation does not.
Four themes emerge from the narratives. First, stakeholder identification and engagement emphasises alumni reunions and community events like Brigada Eskwela. Second, communication and information sharing relies heavily on social media for transparency. Third, collaboration and partnership involves PTAs in participative decision-making. Fourth, monitoring and evaluation tracks engagement through metrics and feedback mechanisms.
The narrative gap
Each theme reveals the same pattern. Schools have built the infrastructure of engagement without building the narrative of belonging. Stakeholders are identified, invited, and counted. They are not consistently integrated into the strategic story the school tells about itself.
Consider the social media finding. Schools open official accounts to share news, events, achievements. They broadcast. They do not dialogue. The platform enables information dissemination but not genuine communication. Stakeholders receive updates. They do not shape direction.
The PTA finding is equally revealing. Parents participate in decision-making processes. But the study notes that schools need to improve incorporation of stakeholder identification planning into broader school improvement processes. Participation is procedural. Influence is limited.
The alumni paradox
Alumni engagement illustrates the gap most sharply. Schools identify graduates as stakeholders. They organise homecomings. They tap influential alumni for resources. Yet the study explicitly states that more action must be taken to improve communication and teamwork. Alumni are present in the database. They are absent from the strategic narrative.
This aligns with findings from Glassdoor research showing that employee presence does not indicate conviction. An alumnus who attends reunions but whose expertise never shapes school direction is not genuine engagement. They are evidence of narrative fracture, politely managed.
The rural and remote specificity
The Philippine context matters. Rural schools serve farming communities. Remote schools face isolation, meagre resources, and high teacher retention problems. Cultural differences impact education in ways standardised policies do not address. These schools cannot rely on urban proximity or dense professional networks. Their stakeholder relationships must be intentional, sustained, and deeply integrated.
The study notes that rural and remote schools face different challenges and opportunities because they stand far from the mainstream. This isolation makes narrative coherence more critical, not less. When external validation is scarce, internal alignment becomes essential.
The connection to narrative alignment
This research validates the Mysfit framework. Schools do not have a stakeholder identification problem. They have a stakeholder integration problem. The gap between identification and incorporation is where shadow narratives form.
When support staff are on the roster but their expertise never shapes inclusion policy, they learn their role is operational, not strategic. When alumni are in the database but their insights never inform school improvement, they learn their relationship is transactional, not transformational. When parents attend meetings but decisions are already made, they learn their participation is performative, not powerful.
The quantitative deception
The moderately high scores are perhaps the most troubling finding. Schools believe they are engaging stakeholders because they have built the infrastructure. They have the committees, the events, the social media accounts. They do not have the narrative integration.
Research on organisational crisis reveals that managers miss early warning signals because they trust structured data over atmospheric truth. The Philippine study confirms this pattern. The 3.9 out of 5 score signals success. The qualitative narratives reveal fracture.
The fix is internal, not external
Arguelles and Sarsale conclude that comprehensive management of stakeholders is necessary to succeed with partnerships that support improved school performance. They recommend more frequent engagement, improved communication, and better incorporation of stakeholder input into strategic planning.
This is correct but incomplete. The fix is not more engagement activities. It is narrative alignment. Each stakeholder group must see their specific role in the school's unfolding story. Not as identified participants. As essential characters.
The question for leadership
Before your next stakeholder engagement initiative, ask: Do we have an identification problem, or an integration problem? Are our stakeholders present but invisible in our strategic narrative? Have we built the infrastructure of engagement without building the story of belonging?
The Philippine research confirms what international schools have ignored. The gap is not between schools and stakeholders. It is between the story schools tell and the story stakeholders live.
