If you have been following this blog you will know that one of my schools is going to have to move one of its buildings a couple of miles away from its current location. Those few of us that have been involved so far have been up and down the change curve, in depression and delight, in fear and fancifulness - all natural, and almost inevitable, responses to imposed change. Now I know that it is important to 'take control' as much as possible and avoid a feeling of 'being done to'. We had managed to get to this point.
Now the game changes - the proposal is in the public arena for examination by parents, other staff, other governors, etc - each of which is startinjg where we did 3 months ago; each of which has to go through their own process of denial, despair, resistance, depression before starting to see a way forward. Each individual moves at their own pace and our role as leaders is to help the progress along its' way, to be supportive, to acknowledge the pain that people will be going through and to help them move forward constructively.
Too often it is easy to forget the journey that we pathfinders made and to expect everyone else to be up to speed instantly; this is where we can lose people if we do not recognise the need for time to heal the pain of loss before taking a newe direction It is also too easy, especially for those of us brought up in the rational world (engineers, chemists, etc) to fail to recognise the affective issues that come into play. Whilst moving from Site A to Site B might seem like a perfectly sensible and practical thing to do, for many of the people involved if affects them much more deeply than our left-brain thinking might suggest. We need to work with the heart as well as the head and that takes time...
Friday, 11 December 2009
Wednesday, 9 December 2009
Performance Management - thoughts on targets
If you have not already done it, then the pressure is on to complete your Head's performance management before the end of term. Setting targets is a challenging task for both the reviewers and the Head - for what do we set targets, how tough should they be?
For me this also raises the interesting territory of 'Lead' and 'Lag' indicators - improving teaching and learning (if we can find a way to measure it!) being a Lead indicator that leads to improved outcomes/attainment, a Lag indicator.
Early in ther implementation of targeting sytems we often end up with lag indicators (cohort performance, staff attendance, etc) whereas as they become more sophisticated we can move to the Lead indicators that we believe will eventually produce improved performance. This might be regarded as a shift from management to leadership.
...and how tough? My guidance, and I have facilitated the implementation of PM systems all over the place, has tended to be "deliverable, but only just". They need to be challenging enough for yor Head to have to think differently but not so challenging that they don't even try because they are obviously undeliverable. So improving pupil attendance from 80% to 95% in 1 year is likely to be undelliverable, whereas to 85% could be a real challenge yet achievablke with a following wind.
This in turn leads to consideration of success criteria. If everyone's targets are all delivered, then they were not tough enough. I accept that soemtimes a target might not be delivered; the trick here is to satisfy myself that a serious effort has been made and that unexpected factors intervened to inhibit delivery.
What do you thinnk?
For me this also raises the interesting territory of 'Lead' and 'Lag' indicators - improving teaching and learning (if we can find a way to measure it!) being a Lead indicator that leads to improved outcomes/attainment, a Lag indicator.
Early in ther implementation of targeting sytems we often end up with lag indicators (cohort performance, staff attendance, etc) whereas as they become more sophisticated we can move to the Lead indicators that we believe will eventually produce improved performance. This might be regarded as a shift from management to leadership.
...and how tough? My guidance, and I have facilitated the implementation of PM systems all over the place, has tended to be "deliverable, but only just". They need to be challenging enough for yor Head to have to think differently but not so challenging that they don't even try because they are obviously undeliverable. So improving pupil attendance from 80% to 95% in 1 year is likely to be undelliverable, whereas to 85% could be a real challenge yet achievablke with a following wind.
This in turn leads to consideration of success criteria. If everyone's targets are all delivered, then they were not tough enough. I accept that soemtimes a target might not be delivered; the trick here is to satisfy myself that a serious effort has been made and that unexpected factors intervened to inhibit delivery.
What do you thinnk?
Friday, 4 December 2009
What a result!
This week we have had the (very) nice ladies from Ofsted digging and delving, observing and commenting and all the rest of the stuff they do.
Whilst there has been some understandable stress and not a little digging out and representation of data, it has all been worth it. Despite Ofsted raising the bar since we got a Satisfactory last time, we got a GOOD.
Congratulations to everyone at the school - although the leadership team have worked thier whatsits off over the last couple of days, it is the consistent hard work of everyone in the scchool over the last couple of years that have really made the difference. Well done everyone.
As Chair, I had about 45 minutes with them on day 2. They were especially interested to establish how well we knew our statutory obligations regarding Safeguarding and also Community Cohesion. So now we all know!
Whilst there has been some understandable stress and not a little digging out and representation of data, it has all been worth it. Despite Ofsted raising the bar since we got a Satisfactory last time, we got a GOOD.
Congratulations to everyone at the school - although the leadership team have worked thier whatsits off over the last couple of days, it is the consistent hard work of everyone in the scchool over the last couple of years that have really made the difference. Well done everyone.
As Chair, I had about 45 minutes with them on day 2. They were especially interested to establish how well we knew our statutory obligations regarding Safeguarding and also Community Cohesion. So now we all know!
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Inspired by Sir Ken...
I went to see Sir Ken Robinson speak last night, courtesy of Education Leeds.
Inspirational, funny and with some content as well – truly a rare combination for any ‘motivational speaker’.
Whilst finding much of what he said valuable, I wrote down one quote that struck me as especially significant “Our assumptions influence our perceptions before they drive our conceptions”. In my work, both in and out of schools, I have found this principle hugely helpful when dealing with ‘stuck’ situations – the challenge is the one that Einstein highlighted, namely that the level of thinking that created a problem cannot solve it. In unearthing these assumptions, there is a key role for independent process facilitation by individuals who have no significant investment in the outcome of the challenge they make to their clients. Who is providing this challenge/facilitation as we move education into the 21st Century?
The jobs our children will do are still to be created, the technology they will use will be beyond our current comprehension (how many of us 50-odd year olds could have imagined an i-phone when we were 10 years old?!), the skills they will need an dhow they will use them remain to be understood. We need a 21st Century system that equips pupils for the technological/knowledge-based future not the industrial revolution.
Inspirational, funny and with some content as well – truly a rare combination for any ‘motivational speaker’.
Whilst finding much of what he said valuable, I wrote down one quote that struck me as especially significant “Our assumptions influence our perceptions before they drive our conceptions”. In my work, both in and out of schools, I have found this principle hugely helpful when dealing with ‘stuck’ situations – the challenge is the one that Einstein highlighted, namely that the level of thinking that created a problem cannot solve it. In unearthing these assumptions, there is a key role for independent process facilitation by individuals who have no significant investment in the outcome of the challenge they make to their clients. Who is providing this challenge/facilitation as we move education into the 21st Century?
The jobs our children will do are still to be created, the technology they will use will be beyond our current comprehension (how many of us 50-odd year olds could have imagined an i-phone when we were 10 years old?!), the skills they will need an dhow they will use them remain to be understood. We need a 21st Century system that equips pupils for the technological/knowledge-based future not the industrial revolution.
Tuesday, 17 November 2009
Head or heart?
Our move of site is moving forward - slowly and with some discomfort. As a change management/leadership professional this is an interesting experience to be part of, so I thought I might offer a few observations on how everything is happening rather than what is going on.
Only to be expected for such a significant change as there are (at least) two processes going on in parallel. Firstly the building of a team who will decide on a proposal and then deliver it; secondly the personal transitions from As-Is to To-Be. Let's explore what is likely to be happening...
The team development 'route' is well known (Tuckman, if you really want the source) - Form, Storm, Norm, Perform, Unform. At a meeting last night there was a lot of frustration expressed, people needing to have their say, to understand how the overall process would work... Classic 'storming' behaviour and necessary if the team is to really start to get to grips with the task they face. It's important that everyone involved recognises this and works through it, only then can we start to sort out how to make the team work effectively (norming) and ultimately get on with stuff. As a process observer, the big challenge here is to get participants to realise that these processes happen and take time so that the team needs forming early enough to enable a health process to take place before real decisions have to be made.
The change journey model that I find most helpful is based on the work of Elisabeth Ross-Kubler and has been summarised into six stages - Shock, Denial, Anger/Depression, Resignation, Acceptance, Future Focus.
Shock - WHAT! Nobody has paid attention to our needs!
Denial - SURELY NOT! It can't be as bad as that!
Anger/Depression - GRRRRR!!!! "They" really don't care/understand!
Resignation - OH WELL If that's what they want there is not much I can do about it.
Acceptance - OK If that's how it is going to be, what's the best way forward for me?
Future Focus - Right, so this is what I am going to do now.
So there we were blaming others, wondering what next, trying to find out what 'they' wanted, who would be making the 'real' decisions - classic 'victim' behaviour in the Anger/Depression position. We could continue as Victims or we could start to take positive action to address our concerns (which was what happened and is still happening) thus moving ourselves through the powerless Anger and Depression.
Anyway - what a change to be able to observe this stuff in action and to write about it.
One final thought - what did I use the title "Head or Heart"? Well because any change inevitably involves both head and heart. The (relatively) easy stuff is the cognitive/intellectual reasoning and redesign - 'head work'. The hard bit is to move from intellectual acceptance to affective/emotional understanding - 'heart work'. This latter is often underestimated, especially by those who due to the nature of their work routinely redesign schools and provision and may not understand the emotional issues being faced by those actually working in and with the school. The 'head' people may find moving through the change curve easy and quick, the 'hearts' risk getting trapped in the early stages - and communication between the two camps gets harder and more frustrating. Each party needs to clearly express their current needs and persist in getting them met before it is possible to move forward.
Head or Heart then? Well, both actually.
Only to be expected for such a significant change as there are (at least) two processes going on in parallel. Firstly the building of a team who will decide on a proposal and then deliver it; secondly the personal transitions from As-Is to To-Be. Let's explore what is likely to be happening...
The team development 'route' is well known (Tuckman, if you really want the source) - Form, Storm, Norm, Perform, Unform. At a meeting last night there was a lot of frustration expressed, people needing to have their say, to understand how the overall process would work... Classic 'storming' behaviour and necessary if the team is to really start to get to grips with the task they face. It's important that everyone involved recognises this and works through it, only then can we start to sort out how to make the team work effectively (norming) and ultimately get on with stuff. As a process observer, the big challenge here is to get participants to realise that these processes happen and take time so that the team needs forming early enough to enable a health process to take place before real decisions have to be made.
The change journey model that I find most helpful is based on the work of Elisabeth Ross-Kubler and has been summarised into six stages - Shock, Denial, Anger/Depression, Resignation, Acceptance, Future Focus.
Shock - WHAT! Nobody has paid attention to our needs!
Denial - SURELY NOT! It can't be as bad as that!
Anger/Depression - GRRRRR!!!! "They" really don't care/understand!
Resignation - OH WELL If that's what they want there is not much I can do about it.
Acceptance - OK If that's how it is going to be, what's the best way forward for me?
Future Focus - Right, so this is what I am going to do now.
So there we were blaming others, wondering what next, trying to find out what 'they' wanted, who would be making the 'real' decisions - classic 'victim' behaviour in the Anger/Depression position. We could continue as Victims or we could start to take positive action to address our concerns (which was what happened and is still happening) thus moving ourselves through the powerless Anger and Depression.
Anyway - what a change to be able to observe this stuff in action and to write about it.
One final thought - what did I use the title "Head or Heart"? Well because any change inevitably involves both head and heart. The (relatively) easy stuff is the cognitive/intellectual reasoning and redesign - 'head work'. The hard bit is to move from intellectual acceptance to affective/emotional understanding - 'heart work'. This latter is often underestimated, especially by those who due to the nature of their work routinely redesign schools and provision and may not understand the emotional issues being faced by those actually working in and with the school. The 'head' people may find moving through the change curve easy and quick, the 'hearts' risk getting trapped in the early stages - and communication between the two camps gets harder and more frustrating. Each party needs to clearly express their current needs and persist in getting them met before it is possible to move forward.
Head or Heart then? Well, both actually.
Monday, 9 November 2009
Communicate, communicate, communicate...
Communicate, communicate, communicate...is the mantra of all effective change leaders. We know, and have recently experienced, that in the absence of any communication rumours start and circulate. Those rumours may or may not be based on 'truth' and certainly get transmogrified as the Chinese Whisper process affects them.
The message to us governors, as strategic leaders in our schools, is that we need to be proactive about communicating. This matters especially during any period of uncertainty or change. The need goes so far as to issue bulletins (or whatever) explaining that 'nothing has happened or changed'. This latter is counter-intuitive as our tendency is to only communicate when we have something to say.
Finally, when the rumours DO start - avoid scapegoating and witch-hunts. It's almost inevitable that legitimate and often informal discussions 'leak' into the public domain and get turned into rumours. Seeking out and punishing 'the guilty' will just close down communications channels and lead to disaffection in those who we most need to be open.
I have long had a set of principles for communicating during change:
• Those most affected will be the first to hear
• Our people will hear things first from their managers
• We will use multiple channels to communicate with our people
• “One hymn, one hymn sheet”
• We will be as quick to give any bad news as the good
• We will be as open as possible
• Face-to-face will be our preferred route for all major communications
• Wherever possible we will avoid jargon, where not possible we will explain it
• Individuals making decisions will have personal accountability for ensuring that those affected by the decision are communicated with effectively
• We will ensure that there is an unfiltered feedback route from our people to the top team
• There will be regular updates on progress
• We recognise the existence of The Grapevine and will try to be sure that it deals in facts not fiction
The message to us governors, as strategic leaders in our schools, is that we need to be proactive about communicating. This matters especially during any period of uncertainty or change. The need goes so far as to issue bulletins (or whatever) explaining that 'nothing has happened or changed'. This latter is counter-intuitive as our tendency is to only communicate when we have something to say.
Finally, when the rumours DO start - avoid scapegoating and witch-hunts. It's almost inevitable that legitimate and often informal discussions 'leak' into the public domain and get turned into rumours. Seeking out and punishing 'the guilty' will just close down communications channels and lead to disaffection in those who we most need to be open.
I have long had a set of principles for communicating during change:
• Those most affected will be the first to hear
• Our people will hear things first from their managers
• We will use multiple channels to communicate with our people
• “One hymn, one hymn sheet”
• We will be as quick to give any bad news as the good
• We will be as open as possible
• Face-to-face will be our preferred route for all major communications
• Wherever possible we will avoid jargon, where not possible we will explain it
• Individuals making decisions will have personal accountability for ensuring that those affected by the decision are communicated with effectively
• We will ensure that there is an unfiltered feedback route from our people to the top team
• There will be regular updates on progress
• We recognise the existence of The Grapevine and will try to be sure that it deals in facts not fiction
Monday, 26 October 2009
An eventful week...
So, we have to move from one of our current sites - and we have to have a new site ready to occupy from the beginning of the next academic year! Quite a challenge, given that we do not yet have a clear and agreed option.
Have spent the last 2 weeks (or so!) in detailed discussions with out LEA and Leadership Team exploring about 20 odd possibilities; briefing staff and governors; writing to parents, letting pupils know (interesting challenge as we are a Special School with a range of relatively low-functioning pupils) and finally waiting for the storm to break, I am very pleased at the lack of response.
For me, the message from all of this is the value and success of letting people know as soon as possible about a situation that will affect them. In this situation the message had to be "We have to move but we don't know where to. We will keep you in touch, listen to and address your concerns." Now that might seem like a non-message but it has been very well received and my faith in people to deal with uncertainty and ambiguity has been reaffirmed. Some will need more support that others through this journey and we have put/are putting in place support mechanisms.
As a change leadership professional (I have to earn a living somehow!) I am often asked about the critical actions during change - my answer always includes "Communicate, communicate, communicate". Even when there is nothing to say, you have to say that there is nothing to say, in order to quell the rumour machine.
So far, so good.
Have spent the last 2 weeks (or so!) in detailed discussions with out LEA and Leadership Team exploring about 20 odd possibilities; briefing staff and governors; writing to parents, letting pupils know (interesting challenge as we are a Special School with a range of relatively low-functioning pupils) and finally waiting for the storm to break, I am very pleased at the lack of response.
For me, the message from all of this is the value and success of letting people know as soon as possible about a situation that will affect them. In this situation the message had to be "We have to move but we don't know where to. We will keep you in touch, listen to and address your concerns." Now that might seem like a non-message but it has been very well received and my faith in people to deal with uncertainty and ambiguity has been reaffirmed. Some will need more support that others through this journey and we have put/are putting in place support mechanisms.
As a change leadership professional (I have to earn a living somehow!) I am often asked about the critical actions during change - my answer always includes "Communicate, communicate, communicate". Even when there is nothing to say, you have to say that there is nothing to say, in order to quell the rumour machine.
So far, so good.
Saturday, 24 October 2009
Safeguarding
I spent 90 minutes yesterday with school colleagues being updated on the latest stuff re safeguarding.Very useful although I have offered feedback about the dire 'lesson plan' - if one of our teachers had delivered the lesson they would have done well to get "Unsatisfactory"!
Still I did learn a bit and it was particularly relevant in the light of my recent participation in a Disciplinary hearing in respect of a (now ex-) staff member who had failed to co-operate in the CRB process.To cut a long story short, it has taken an VERY excessive length of time to dismiss an employee who was offered a conditional contract (conditional on satisfactory CRB check). The circumstances were that, for a while, they worked during the processing of their check (always supervised, etc so minimal risk)
BIG question...once ISA gets up and running we will break the law if we employ anyone without ISA Registration, but they still need a CRB so dare we let anyone actually start work with ISA but not CRB? Personally, I woudl not do so but the delays in the CRB process are such that to make such a conditional offer might seriously disrupt staffing arrangements.
We need assurances that applications will be processed much faster in the future than at present, and we need processes that rapidly 'get rid of' actual or potential staff who do not co-operate in new or revised checks. HR are concerned about the employment law implications of being so harsh, I am concerned about safeguarding and would hope that any Tribunal would weigh the risks and find that safeguarding 'trumped' the other issues.
Still I did learn a bit and it was particularly relevant in the light of my recent participation in a Disciplinary hearing in respect of a (now ex-) staff member who had failed to co-operate in the CRB process.To cut a long story short, it has taken an VERY excessive length of time to dismiss an employee who was offered a conditional contract (conditional on satisfactory CRB check). The circumstances were that, for a while, they worked during the processing of their check (always supervised, etc so minimal risk)
BIG question...once ISA gets up and running we will break the law if we employ anyone without ISA Registration, but they still need a CRB so dare we let anyone actually start work with ISA but not CRB? Personally, I woudl not do so but the delays in the CRB process are such that to make such a conditional offer might seriously disrupt staffing arrangements.
We need assurances that applications will be processed much faster in the future than at present, and we need processes that rapidly 'get rid of' actual or potential staff who do not co-operate in new or revised checks. HR are concerned about the employment law implications of being so harsh, I am concerned about safeguarding and would hope that any Tribunal would weigh the risks and find that safeguarding 'trumped' the other issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
