A School Leaders Playbook

Hitting the Target

It’s a fact that if it were not for constant course corrections, it would be impossible to get from earth to the moon. Over such a great distance, a pre-established path just doesn’t hold true. It’s also true that this same principle fits for organizations.

It is the ability to continually assess the environment and make necessary course corrections that brings about success. Even small corrections may make a big difference in an organization’s effectiveness and in how a school is perceived in the community it serves.

Without specific attention to when correction is needed, it is often pressure that brings it about. When pressure for correction occurs, it is often because the organization is under fire. This taking of fire may come from perceptions about mismanagement, use of money, low test scores, disharmony among staff, low morale, or a mismatch of goals and community values.

When correction is necessary, the first priority is often an immediate need to bleed off pressure or avoid some impending collision. Unfortunately, once the immediate pressure is off, the organization all too often returns to business as usual. A better approach is to take immediate action to reduce pressure while concurrently diagnosing the cause and developing a long-term strategy to implement continued course changes.

Temporary versus Long Term

In the first approach, the solution is temporary and from a consultant’s standpoint it can be most difficult. In these cases, the expectation is often to get people to calm down and accept an immediate solution, sometimes with little chance for real change. The second approach begins with the same need for pressure release but combines this with a plan for needed change so the same problems do not recur.

In contrasting these two approaches, long-term success belongs to leaders who are aware that organizations must make constant corrections, even when things appear to be going smoothly. These leaders understand that consistent attention is required to know when and how corrections should be made. They know that success in making these critical corrections will depend on their leadership approach and their attention to what I call a "team mentality."

A Prevailing Paradigm

What makes developing a team challenging is the very idea that we need to train people to function as a team instead of assuming that they come equipped with all that is required. For some, it’s almost as if there is a paradigm, which prevents even the consideration that we need to develop specific skills and understanding in order to function more effectively as a team. If through commitment this paradigm can be broken and a conscious effort made to build a team mind-set, a new paradigm may form, and it too will seem to have a life of its own.