new spurt of energy, or grind slowly toward a halt. We developed our annual summer work-
shop, Principals in Transition, to support first-time principals as well as those with ex- perience who are being reassigned to another school, along with their district administra- tors. It includes several strands: assessing the needs of the new site, developing trust quickly, maintaining the focus on students, and creating a plan for the first 100 days. For promoted leaders at the central office level, the principles are essentially the same.
Gathering data before taking action Participants learn several options for the
all-important assessment phase, including a transitions survey, a history map, or “sens- ing interviews.” The point of gathering data with any of these tools (prior to taking al- most any kind of new leadership actions, other than those involving student safety) is to share the data with the staff. This is for the purpose of celebrating what is working (and for determining, for
the new leader’s own elucidation, where the sacred cows are), and developing initial steps for long-term plans for issues that need to be addressed, as well as immediate solutions to “simple” problems that just need a quick
With so many transitions on the horizon, district leaders will need to help new principals move from novice leadership to wisdom, and support experienced leaders as they move to new settings.
fix. These short-term wins set an immediate positive tone. The strategies we suggest for quickly
developing trust are vividly described in Stephen R. Covey’s “The Speed of Trust: The One Thing That Changes Everything” (2006). Covey has identified 13 behaviors of a high-trust leader; all grounded in what he
has called “the four cores of credibility” – in- tent, integrity, capabilities and results. In a leadership transition, the old saw,
“You only have one chance to make a first impression” is painfully true. Whether the newly arrived leader is replacing a beloved or less-than-beloved predecessor, and regard- less of either the school’s achievement status or the viability of its operational systems, if staff members experience the new leader’s words, demeanor or actions as disrespect- ful in any arena of interactions, s/he will be viewed as “worse than” the leader who just departed. Thus, we also share examples of common
pitfalls that immediately hinder develop- ment of trust, such as misuse/overuse of po- sitional authority, as in Leonard’s case. One self-aware participant said, “I already know from my years as an AP that my automatic fall-back is command and control. I have to change that.” Another is a lack of understanding of the
“loose/tight” principle, often discussed by Richard and Rebecca DuFour (2010). Some
10 Leadership
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40