It's All About the Team

Though leadership theory has evolved since the 1978 publication of James MacGregor Burns' seminal text Leadership, the idea of transformational leadership -- leadership that works to allow self-actualization of both individuals and society to their highest manifestations -- remains central in for-profit, non-profit, and democratic institutions. As the Gen X generation replaces the Baby Boom generation as leaders and executives, and begins to think about how to lead the Millennial generation -- which has its own very strong ideas about life, the universe and everything -- the idea that work is an avenue for self-transformation, and not simply a way to make a living, emerges as a powerful force.

In this light, though John Baldoni's article on CBSnews.com purports to be thinking about leadership for 20 years in the future, much of what it says is immediately relevant today:

"The post-heroic leader will need to balance the role of boss, mediator and coach, allowing teams more freedom and autonomy while at the same time keeping them focused on objectives," the Hay report says. In other words, it ain't about you the leader -- it's all about the team. Note the use of the word "post-heroic." 

In school settings, it is truly "all about the team." As a leader, my goal is to support and ensure the success of every teacher (who does the same for each student under his or her tutelage), and one of the most powerful tools I have to do that (along with curriculum development support, resource support, and professional development) is to ensure that each faculty member feels that s/he is a member of a successful team. To this end, we use a variety of teams within the division itself; teaching teams within each classroom, grade-level teams across the classrooms, and a division-wide team for issues that concern all classrooms. We also use teams across all three divisions of the school (ECC, Elementary, Middle School) to discuss (and resolve) certain issues, such as curriculum alignment.

Creating good teams is difficult work that requires constant attention to subtle dynamics and interactions, and there is no shortage of literature about creating teams. It's a topic in the first meeting of the year I had with each teaching team, and one we return to throughout the year at each type of team. For example, at last month's Elementary Division meeting, the group brainstormed ways to make our meetings more effective (by level, division, and whole school). Similarly, during the break I came across this article from the Harvard Education Publishing Group on rating (and thereby having a basis for thinking about improving) a teaching team, which I'll be sharing with the teachers during our February division meeting.

Two years ago, Paula, Mitch and I went to hear Pat Bassett, head of NAIS, speak in San Francisco. At that event, Pat outlined three types of school leaders - the General, who will achieve any objective, even at a terrible human cost; the Ambassador, who will build relationships and culture, though not necessarily achieve any objectives; and the Priest, who has a vision of the future that enraptures a core of believers but alienates many others. Pat's theory was that most school leaders are naturally drawn to one of the archetypes, and at most can learn to be effective at two of the roles (which lead him to some conclusions about how to be a successful leader); however, I would propose that to be a leader who is  effective at creating strong teams, one one has to shift between these roles depending on each context and situation.