Leadership Study
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Leadership Study

on

  • 1,016 views

These are the Leadership Study Presentation slides. There is a webinar if interested.

These are the Leadership Study Presentation slides. There is a webinar if interested.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,016
Views on SlideShare
1,015
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
14
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.linkedin.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Service = teachers don’t want to recognize it at timesBusiness with the complexity, but accountability as Not-for-profitIncreasing employee numbers, something we are having to address in the fiscal shakeupCharitable and need to generate fund-raising dollars and relationshipsMarketing, new media, branding, facebook, twitter. This is not your father/mothers school. Positive and negativeOutreach required in the community local, national and international
  • As a result of the growing complexity of our schools some see the inevitable movement toward more of a CEO model. Others of course abhor the idea. In the end, what is clear is that increasingly our schools are incredibly complex places that require a new analysis of the leadership required.
  • Much of the research, particularly coming from the NAIS addresses the self-imposed ceiling that people have placedupon themselves because of the fear that they have of leading these complex, involved and at times volatile organizations. The question really is, “if there is fear” how can we stem that fear by equipping people with the tools of leadership moving forward, and most importantly, what are those tools.The first most important question is “what is leadership” for us in independent schools.
  • What we see here is the focus on a leader’s responsibility to “influence” others toward achieving institutional goals, not completing them alone. If we talk about influence, this is not accidental, one of the key elements of leading an organization is the idea of “Intentional influence”.If it is intentional, how do we accomplish this and in what ways….
  • As a part of my degree requirements at Royal Roads, we were to engage in a major project, being foolish and naïve, rather than conduct a small study based on a small sample of perhaps a dozen people interviewed, I instead foolishly decided to complete a National research study, both quantitative and qualitative of 140 participants. The work of which took me 16 months and is 220 pages long.Despite all this I am happy to say that I am still married and could recall that my children’s names are Jessie, Brianna and Lindsay.
  • Teachers?
  • Explain demographicExplain opening qualitative33 designed by literature review, dialogue with the Head of the CAIS and using other studies from ISM and NAIS
  • I am now going to run through the results of all of this work and give you a 15 minute 30,000 feet view of these results. I will go into detail about the major overall findings so if you find you are bursting with a question, by all means, however, I am going to spend some time looking at the overall results in more detail.
  • 638 responses responses – explain codifiedEmphasize that this was one question…an important one because it was the opening question that required answer without the bias of already doing the rest of the survey. Initial and gut responses.
  • Question asked and responses on a scale of Mandatory element of Head of School Practice, significant, asset but not priority, not as important and can be delegated Finances and BuckalewSchool spirit –Faculty culture
  • Management trend – Fascinating differences in management between (H-C and SA)Technology, despite the focus in every other part of our NA world, not a concern for Head’sTeaching – Heads not sold – romanticized vision
  • Discuss putting this all together Quan. Qual long response to corroborate
  • Some see trees, some see a path, some look at the leaves, some see the sun shining through the other end…forest through the trees.
  • 20 Questions for 2020Spending time contemplating and actively considering the future of the school. One of the clearest expressions in the study is that Heads must get out of management tasks and focus on the big picture.
  • interviewed five hundred different corporate teams.
  • Ask yourself the question, if in a faculty meeting you gave every faculty member a sheet of paper and asked them to write down the mission of the school, what percentage would be able to accurately deliver it back? What does this say about their ability to carry this out. What does it say about the leadership? Could Board members do this?
  • 4 of 5 use the word….strategic… not manage … conceptualize
  • No clearer expression in the literature. That is why the gap between Heads and Chairs on this topic with respect to management priorities is unsettling.
  • Deal with this in our classrooms, the world of business today….
  • This quotation is as much about transformative leadership as it is about communication but I have put it here because the masccrt are so powerful in our schools for building community and keeping people focussed and committed
  • Tie-in of vision, ethics and communication
  • Forming, Norming, Storming and PerformingJanis –Space shuttle and GladwellOutliersDifficult Conversations
  • Debates with Ted
  • New leadership or level 5 leadership understands that this will be a distributed leadership process, that the leader doesn’t have all the answers and first needs to get people “on the bus” before determining where they are going.Intelligence for Heads is understanding that they can’t know all the answers and so must build a great team

Leadership Study Leadership Study Presentation Transcript

  • Excellence in Independent School Leadership
    TABS 2009
    Courtenay Shrimpton
    Assistant Headmaster
    St. Andrew’s College
    Courtenay.shrimpton@sac.on.ca
    905-717-5080
  • Me
    Growing up
    Dean of Students (LCC)
    Assistant Headmaster (SAC)
    M.A. in Leadership from Royal Roads University
    Author: National Study of Head of School Leadership in 2009
  • The Complex Landscape for Independent School Leadership
    Primary = Educational Mission
    Service Industry
    Hospitality Industry
    Business – Million dollar budgets – Not-for-Profit
    Employer – Hundreds of employees
    Charitable Organization
    Marketing and Communications Firm
    Community oriented organization
  • A School or a (Not-For-Profit) Business?
    “An independent school is a business and the Head's of today are CEO's. Understanding how to effectively manage a business is not something academics come to naturally. The learning curve is big for new Heads.” (H2#25)
  • Leadership is not to be Feared!
  • Leadership means Influencing…
    “Leadership is defined broadly as influencing task objectives and strategies, influencing commitment and compliance in task behaviour to achieve these objectives, influencing group maintenance and identification, and influencing the culture of an organization” (Yukl, 2002)
    “influence…seems to be a necessary part of most conceptions of leadership” (Leithwood, 1999)
  • 2009 National Study on Effective Head of School Practices and Characteristics
    Invitation sent to all CAIS schools to participate
    140 participants in total
    Representing more than 40 schools across Canada
  • Research Question
    “What personal and professional characteristics and practices are indicators of effective leadership for Heads of Canadian independent schools?”
    Four individuals per school:
    Head of School
    Chair of the Board
    two Senior Administrators
  • Survey Design
    Informed Consent
    Large Demographic Section
    1 Opening Qualitative Question
    33 Quantitative Questions
    2 Open-ended Qualitative Questions
  • Study Results
    1. Overall Qualitative Results
    2. Overall Quantitative Results
    3. Overall Study Results
    4. Results By Demographic Group
    Chairs vs. Heads vs. Senior Admin.
    Men vs. Women
    Boys Schools vs. Girls Schools vs. Co-ed Schools
    Small Schools vs. Large Schools
    Day Schools vs Day-Boarding Schools
  • Qualitative Results
    Opening Question:
    Write down what you believe are 3-5 key elements of effective Head of School practice.
    (Please answer before you proceed to other questions)
    Over 600 responses
  • Quantitative Results
    Think-Pair-Share
    Most Important Professional Practices for a Head of School…
    Most Important Personal Characteristics for a Head of School…
  • Coded Qualitative Results – Key Characteristics of an Effective Head of School
    1. Visionary – Strategic Thinking
    2. Ethics, Trustworthiness, Integrity and Judgement
    3. Excellent Communication Skills – Speaking/Listening
    4. Effective Interpersonal Relationship Building and Management
    5. Educational Specific Knowledge/Skills
    6. Empathy, Compassion and Patience
    7. Leadership, Leadership skills
    8. Tremendous Work Ethic and Energy
    9. Distributed Leadership or Delegation
    10. Management and Process Focussed
  • Overall Quantitative Results
    Top Five Most Important Practices for a Head of School
    #1. The Head of School actively promotes the mission of the school in all decisions.
    (Boarding = #2)
      #2. The Head of School considers the long-term vision for the future of the school.
    (Boarding = #1)
    #3. The Head of School considers the impact decisions have on the entire school community.
    (Boarding = #3)
    #4. The Head of School has an understanding of the significant financial issues of the school.
    (Boarding = #6)
    #5. The Head of School works to develop a positive school spirit/climate.
    (Boarding = #5)
  • Overall Quantitative Results
    Top Five Least Important Practices for a Head of School
    #1.The Head of School teaches in the classroom or coaches.
    (Boarding #1)
    #2. The Head of School manages initiatives from conception to application.
    (Boarding #4)
    #3.The Head of School has detailed knowledge of technology and its use in the classroom.
    (Boarding #2)
    #4. The Head of School attends meetings at all levels of the organization.
    (Boarding # 3)
    #5. The Head of School focuses on the daily operation of the school.
    (Boarding #5)
  • Overall Quantitative Results
    Top Five Most Important
    Characteristics for a Head of School
     
    #1. Trustworthiness
     
    #2. Ethical
     
    #3. Strong Communicator
     
    #4. Intelligent
     
    #5. Distributes Leadership
    Top Five Least Important Characteristics for a Head of School
     
    #1. Spontaneous
     
    #2. Cautious
     
    #3. Parent-Centred
     
    #4. Process-Oriented
     
    #5. Management Focussed
  • When you put Quantitative and Qualitative Data Together…
    Eight Overall Findings
    1. Systems’ Thinking and Strategic Thinking
  • What do you see?
  • #1 isSystems Thinking
    Systems Thinking is …
    “a way of helping a person to view systems from a broad perspective that includes seeing overall structures, patterns and cycles in systems, rather than seeing only specific events in the system. This broad view can help you to quickly identify the real causes of issues in organizations and know just where to work to address them” (McNamara, 2008)
  • #1 is Systems Thinking -- Business
    Jesse Stoner in her extensive study on the impact of vision on organizational performance.
    Leaders who demonstrated strong visionary leadership had the highest performing teams.
    Those with good management skills but limited vision had average teams.
    Those without vision and weak in management had poor teams.
  • #1 is Systems Thinking
    “The shared commitment to living the mission, vision, and value statements become the moral purpose for the school.” (Fullan)
  • #1 is Systems Thinking in Practice
    Davies, Ellison and Browning write that school leaders must have the organizational ability to…
    Be strategically oriented;
    Translate strategy into action;
    Align people and organizations;
    Determine effective strategic intervention points;
    Develop strategic capabilities
  • Systems Thinking
    Those leaders who fail to attend to the systems at play within an organization, and who fail to focus on the future vision of a company, do so at their organization’s peril.
  • Eight Overall Study Findings…
    Quantitative and Qualitative Findings Combined
    1. Systems’ Thinking and Strategic Thinking
    2. Ethics and Trustworthiness
  • #2 Ethics and Trust
    “There is no moral precept that does not have something inconvenient about it”
    Denis Diderot
    Day, Harris and Hadfield (2001) studied twelve schools in England and Wales and found that the leader’s own ethics and values played a substantial and significant role in the overall ethical orientation of the school:
    “Good leaders are informed by and communicate clear sets of personal and educational values which represent their moral purposes for the school”
  • Eight Overall Study Findings…
    Quantitative and Qualitative Findings Combined
    1. Systems’ Thinking and Strategic Thinking
    2. Ethics and Trustworthiness
    3. Communication
  • #3 is Effective Communication
    “Transforming leaders clarify and illustrate the vision, values, and beliefs by using metaphors, analogies, stories, ceremonies, celebrations, rituals and traditions” (Pielstick, p. 20). It is through these relationships and the communication within these relationships, that conversation becomes a conduit for building the transformative capacity of both individuals within the organization and the organization itself.
  • #3 is Communication
    “The alternative to effective communication models can result in schools where,comparatively few teachers were able to speak with any confidence about the elements of the vision. This would suggest that… the headteachers of these schools had not consciously and deliberately set out to communicate their vision to colleagues and to ensure that its influence permeated every aspect of organisational life.” (Bolam et al 1993).
  • Factors Affecting Group Communication Processes
    Argyris – Ladders of Inference
    Tuckman – Developmental Communication Sequence in Small Groups
    Janis – Groupthink
    DeBono – Six Thinking Hats
    The word “listen” contains the same letters as the word “silent”
  • Eight Overall Study Findings…
    Quantitative and Qualitative Findings Combined
    1. Systems’ Thinking and Strategic Thinking
    2. Ethics and Trustworthiness
    3. Communication
    4. Emotional Intelligence
  • #4 is Emotional Intelligence
    Emotional Intelligence refers the capacity to recognize your own feelings and those of others, for motivating yourself, and for managing emotions well in yourself and in your relationships.
  • #4 Emotional Intelligence
  • #4 is Emotional Intelligence
  • #4 is Emotional Intelligence
    “If leaders fail in this primal task of driving emotions in the right direction, nothing they do will work as well as it could or should".
    Goleman and Kee (1996)
    Self Awareness
    Self Management
    Social Awareness
    Relationship Management.
  • Goleman and Kee – Primal Leadership
  • Eight Overall Study Findings…
    Quantitative and Qualitative Findings Combined
    1. Systems’ Thinking and Strategic Thinking
    2. Ethics and Trustworthiness
    3. Communication
    4. Emotional Intelligence
    5. Transformative versus Charismatic
    6. Distributed Leadership
  • #5 is Transformative and #6 is Distributed
  • Transformative vs. Charismatic
    Charismatic is an adjective that describes the attributes of a singular person.
    Transformative is a verb that has no particular attachment to an individual, but is an action word that can be applied to individuals, groups, organizations
    Smile Factor or Action
  • #5 is Transformative Leader
    “We judge leaders not only by the effectiveness of their actions, but also by the meanings they create and teach.”
    Nye, J. (2009)
  • Transformative to Distributed Leadership
    Do we wait for a prophet, religious or charismatic, to appear on high? The related theory and research of the past fifty years, and best practice of the 1990’s indicates otherwise, for it plainly tells us that no single person alone has the combined capacity to do the job.(Telford, 1996)
  • #6 is Distributed Leadership
    “Leaders will need to effectively involve others and elicit participation because tasks will be too complex and information too widely distributed for leaders to solve problems on their own” (Schien)
    Sergiovannimakes the same point more forcefully for the world of education by suggesting it will require a collective of empowered interest to be successful.
  • #6 is Distributed Leadership
    “The notion of leadership density, where teachers (and others) become empowered to take on the role of leaders, and jointly undertake the institutionalization of the school’s vision, is fundamental to the notion of collaboration”(Telford)
    How “dense” and empowered is your school environment?
  • Distributed Leadership and Healthy Debate
    Collins (2001), indicates that the most successful companies involved teams where vigorous debate was encouraged as part of the decision-making, but once the process was decided, unwavering commitment was enforced.
  • Transformative and Distributed Leadership
    Robert Starratt has gone so far as to develop a model of leadership known as the communal institutionalizing of vision. Starratt contends, “if schools are to be successful, leadership must be transforming, translating vision into the daily operation of educational activities through shared processes”. (1988)
  • Eight Overall Study Findings…
    Quantitative and Qualitative Findings Combined
    1. Systems’ Thinking and Strategic Thinking
    2. Ethics and Trustworthiness
    3. Communication
    4. Emotional Intelligence
    5. Distributed Leadership versus Management
    6. Transformative versus Charismatic
    7. Intelligence
  • #7 Intelligence
    Surprise that is not nearer the top of the list?
    Not one mention of advanced degrees in qualitative responses
    Does not require the all knowing leader, but engages the collective intellectual capacity of all the “who” within an organization
    First Who, Then What…
  • Collins and New Intelligence
    Jim Collins
  • Eight Overall Study Findings…
    Quantitative and Qualitative Findings Combined
    1. Systems’ Thinking and Strategic Thinking
    2. Ethics and Trustworthiness
    3. Communication
    4. Emotional Intelligence
    5. Distributed Leadership versus Management
    6. Transformative versus Charismatic
    7. Intelligence
    8. Finances, Advancement and Governance not as important
  • #8 Finances, Governance, Advancement not as important?
    Much feared development of a CEO model….X
    Advancement and Governance questions ranked #18, 24, 25, 27 out of 32 in the quantitative results
    Few people commented on this as a priority in the qualitative
    Research participants clearly felt that the financial side of a school, can be delegated to an effective business manager and sub-committee of the Board of Governors.
  • Eight Findings Come Together
    “This power cannot be predicted by assessing the strength of individual forces or by summing their combined power.  It is the simultaneity of their convergence, that they all come together in the moment, that creates their power” (Wheately and Frieze)
  • Eight Findings Come Together
    “Someone who has a clear vision for the school, leads the Board to support it through an organic, inclusive process, inspires others to understand the vision's meaning and significance, and communicates it with all constituents of the school community. The Head needs to exercise excellent judgement and act in the best interest of the school's future. He or she must be determined and committed to the school and have a passion for the future of society and the betterment of the world through an unwavering belief in the possibility of youth” (H1#24).
  • Huge Differences in Some Areas
    A comparison of different constituent groups:
    Heads vs. Chairs vs. Senior Administrators
    Men vs. Women
    Boys Schools vs. Girls Schools vs. Co-ed Schools
    Large Schools vs. Small Schools
    Day Schools vs. Day-Boarding Schools
  • Constituent ResultsHeads vs. Chairs vs. Senior Admin.
    Top Three Differences
    #1. Chairs of the Board believe it is a more “Mandatory” for Heads to ensure that Upper Management are carrying out their daily operational functions effectively by 30.1% over those in Senior Administration and 15.6% over Heads of School.
  • Constituent ResultsHeads vs. Chairs vs. Senior Admin.
    Top Three Differences
    #2. Chairs of the Board and those in Senior Administration believe a Head of School who teaches in the classroom or coaches is not an important element of Head of School leadership over Heads of School by 27.4% and 26.7% respectively.
  • Constituent ResultsHeads vs. Chairs vs. Senior Admin.
    Top Three Differences
    #3. Chairs of the Board believe it is more “Mandatory” for Heads of School to facilitate the growth of faculty and staff culture by a difference of 25.8% over those in Senior Administration and 11.6% over Heads of School.
  • Constituent ResultsMen vs. Women *
    Top Three Differences
    ____more than ____ feel that it is a more “Mandatory” part of Head of School practice to…
    1. …maintain links with, and be a frequent presence in, all parts of the school community by a difference of 23.8%.
    2. …facilitate the growth of faculty and staff culture by a difference of 23.4%.
    3. …to be available to people, accommodating and generous with their time by a difference of 22.9%.
  • Constituent ResultsBoys’ vs. Girls’ vs. Co-ed
    Top Three Differences
    #1. Girls’ and Co-ed schools feel that it is a more “Mandatory” to be involved in the hiring process for all faculty by a difference of 43.6% and 30.3% respectively over those in Boys’ schools.
  • Constituent Results Boys’ vs. Girls’ vs. Co-ed
    Top Three Differences
    #2. Individuals who work within Girls’ and Co-ed schools feel that it is a more “Mandatory” part of Head of School practice to manage conflict effectively by a difference of 41.7% and 35.2% respectively over those in boys’ schools.
  • Constituent Results Boys’ vs. Girls’ vs. Co-ed
    Top Three Differences
    #3. Individuals who work within Co-ed schools feel that it is more necessary to delegate teaching in the classroom or coaching as a part of Head of School practice by a difference of 34.4% over those in Boys’ schools and 21.3% over those in Girls’ schools.
  • Constituent ResultsLarge Schools vs. Small Schools
    Top Three Differences
    #1. Individuals who work within Small schools feel that it is more a mandatory part of Head of School practice to be involved in the hiring process for all faculty by a difference of 36.6% over those in Large schools.
  • Constituent Results Large Schools vs. Small Schools
    Top Three Differences
    #2. Individuals who work within Small schools feel that it is a more “Mandatory” part of Head of School practice to be available to people, accommodating and generous with their time by a difference of 28.6% over those in Large schools.
  • Constituent Results Large Schools vs. Small Schools
    Top Three Differences
    #3. Individuals who work within Large schools feel that it is a more “Mandatory” part of Head of School practice to consider the long-term vision for the future of the school by a difference of 22.9% over those in Small schools.
  • Constituent ResultsDay vs. Day-Boarding
    Top Three Differences
    #1. Individuals who work within Day-Boarding schools feel that it is more mandatory/significant a part of Head of School practice to be a charismatic individual by a difference of 17.2%over Day Schools.
  • Constituent ResultsDay vs. Day-Boarding
    Top Three Differences
    #2. Individuals who work within Day schools feel that it is more mandatory a part of Head of School practice to have an understanding of the significant financial issues of the schools by a difference of 17% over Day-Boarding Schools.
  • Constituent ResultsDay vs. Day-Boarding
    Top Three Differences
    #3. Individuals who work within Day schools feel that it is a more mandatory part of Head of School practice to be involved in the hiring process of all faculty by a difference of 16.8% over Day-Boarding.
  • Next Steps
    Reflection
    Professional development – Individual and group
    Focus group extension of results
    Leadership Handbook
    Leadership Institutes for New Heads
    Head Evaluation and Compensation Committees based on agreed Head development
    Leadership/Management Team and Board development workshops
    Accreditation Agencies
    Head Search Firms
  • Thank you!
    courtenay.shrimpton@sac.on.ca
    Business card