Teach & Serve III, No. 15 – Management and Leadership

Teach & Serve III, No. 15

Management and Leadership

November 15, 2017

Managers direct by telling. Leaders invite by inspiring.

At a leadership seminar a few weeks back, I heard a great story about dealing with one of a school’s most favorite days of the year: Halloween. I was asking the group with which I was working if they had to jump right back into work when they returned from our week-long seminar and one of the members of the cohort said, with noticeable relief, not only did she not have any school-related, weekend responsibilities (our seminar ended on a Friday morning), she did not have to teach Monday or Tuesday of the following week because her school would be closed.

Why? I asked.

Because we don’t want to deal with Halloween, so the principal shuts us down. She said.

What a nifty thing to do. Talk about a great way to deal with what can be a perennial issue at a co-ed high school. Nicely done, I thought.

Nicely managed.

Another conversation I had during that same leadership seminar struck me as well. One of my colleagues on the seminar was talking about a task she had been given. She was to serve on an interview committee for a school presidency. She was emailed a list of questions to ask, told the time frame she had to ask them and ordered to report to an office to interview candidates at a prescribed date. Whoever invited her on the committee missed the mark. Poorly done, I thought.

Poorly led.

There is a difference between leadership and management and school leaders would be well served to understand that and to know when to apply which skill. Good leaders have skills related to leadership and skills related to management. The Venn Diagram between the two overlaps, to be sure. Management and leadership are not polar opposites.  But they are different.

Management deals with the mechanics of getting things done, of making lists and checking off items, of tackling immediate issues. Leadership deals with thinking big picture, challenging boundaries, defining mission.

Managers direct by telling. Leaders invite by inspiring.

The Halloween situation I mentioned above was well handled, well managed. Perhaps dealing with this scenario did not require leadership, but management. Leadership applied here may have asked broader questions, considered why Halloween was an issue at the school, sought to engage outside-the-box thinking for a solution. Likely that would have been an unnecessary approach.

Similarly, the situation with the teacher asked to be on the committee needed more leadership than management. The teacher was managed, to be sure. But the process cried out for leadership, for vision and inclusion, for broader thinking. Applying management was a miss. Though the interview process likely went well, there was a chance for it to be better.

I believe excellent leaders, when confronted by leadership tasks, ask themselves “is this a leadership opportunity or a management situation?” This is a natural question to them. It is automatic. Then they readily apply the best process. Good school leaders know how to balance management and leadership. They know when to employ which. They know that some situations call for leadership. Others call for management. Excellent leaders switch easily through both.

And, when in doubt, err on the side of leadership. Management, while important, should not be a leader’s default position. Leadership should be.

Pretty simple, right?

It’s just like handling Halloween in a high school or setting up an interview committee… But do not believe there is a right way or a wrong way. There is not.

There is a better way or a worse way, though. Good leaders know the difference.

EduQuote of the Week: November 13 – 19, 2017

Geography Awareness Week

There is an eternal landscape, a geography of the soul; we search for its outlines all our lives.

– Josephine Hart

Office Door Quotes 2

Superheroic Leadership Vol. 1 No. 7 – The Old Order Changeth

Superheroic Leadership Vol. I * No. 7

The Old Order Changeth

Superheroic Leadership is a light-hearted examination of what superheroic figures have to teach about leadership and what I have learned from their adventures.


In Avengers #16, written by Stan Lee and illustrated by Jack Kirby, things are about to change. The roster of the superhero team is about to be re-written. The old order is about to change.

In this issue, Lee coined the phrase “The Old Order Changeth” (in a bastardization of Shakespeare that only Lee could get away with) and this phrase still appears in issues of the comic to this day. In fact, it has appeared in over 115 issues of the title. “The Old Order Changeth” is the catch phrase indicating some heroes are about to move out of Avengers Mansion and others are ready to move in. Reasons for changing up the roster were typically about low sales or the desire to feature a new hero or character.

That’s all well and good.

What I like about this is that changing the roster keeps the Avengers exciting, fresh and, presumably, new.

When the old order changed, it rarely turned over entirely. Rather, stalwarts from one incarnation stayed with the team to shepherd it through the new incarnation. They remained to explain what the Avengers were and what they should be.

I love it.

And that is what leaders do with their teams. They do not surrender to complacency and comfort. They do not settle into routines that are the enemies of creative and courage. Rather, they look to change the order, to bring new people aboard, to offer new opportunities.

And, sometimes, the leader must realize that, for the old order to really “changeth” and for the change to mean anything, the leader herself must go.

It takes Captain America-like bravery to admit that and step aside. Bravery like that in changing the old order must be celebrated.

Teach & Serve III, No. 14 – Highest Duty

Teach & Serve III, No. 14

Highest Duty

November 8, 2017

Leaders support those with whom they work. It is their first and last priority and that mindset informs every priority in between.

I firmly believe that the best leaders serve those they lead just as the best teachers understand they work in service of their students.

I also believe that leaders can only be effective when they are given consent to lead and that classroom teachers are far more effective when the students feel as though they are partners in the learning process.

Yes, some leaders who rely only on authoritarian leadership can push their agendas and compel, by the power of their position, compliance from those who work for them, but I argue that this kind of scenario does not denote leadership.

Leaders support those with whom they work. It is their first and last priority and that mindset informs every priority in between.

Therefore, leaders must be very careful of the structures present in their classrooms and in their schools. They must be aware of the implications policies create in terms of service.

All too often, leaders endorse or create structures and policies that limit their ability to lend needed support. Too frequently, organizations adopt general strictures and broadly apply them at the expense of specific individuals and situations. We tie ourselves in politics, in red tape, and, all too often, in nonsense.

We must cut to the chase: to lead is to serve. To serve is to support. Anything else distracts from our central call as leaders.

What we do in school leadership – as teachers and administrators – is complex work. We need not make our roles to serve more complex by needlessly tying our hands.

A great leader goes to great lengths to provide support. This the highest duty of leadership.

EduQuote of the Week: November 5 – 12, 2017

Sherlock Holmes Weekend

You have a grand gift for silence, Watson. It makes you quite invaluable as a companion.

– Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

Office Door Quotes 2

Teach & Serve III, No. 13 – Tyranny of the Immediate

Teach & Serve III, No. 13

Tyranny of the Immediate

November 1, 2017

When leadership cannot work itself out from under the pressures of what must be done to address what ought to be done, institutions can suffer from a lack of creativity, a dearth of energy and an absence of vision.

Related imageI had the once-in-a-lifetime chance a couple weeks back to attend a gathering of Jesuit educators in Rio De Janeiro which was challenging, inspiring and paradigm shifting. I am still processing the event and will surely have more to write about it in coming editions of this blog but, for now, I was struck by something powerful and direct, a point so important I wanted to share it.

David Laughlin is the long tenured and accomplished president of St. Louis University High School. Intelligent, driven, smart and savvy, David is someone to whom to listen in whatever venue he speaks. At this event, he was the first of four keynotes and his words were what I have come to expect from him: useful and practical while being visionary and uplifting.

He spoke about challenges facing Catholic and Jesuit schools, to be sure, but many of his points are applicable to schools of all models, shapes and sizes.

What I found immediately striking and all-but universal was this question: how do we as teachers and school leaders work to vision for our schools – to reach for the always in motion horizon – when we suffer from what David called “the tyranny of the immediate.”

There is so much that we do in our work that must be done when it is right in front of us and I use the word “must” intentionally. This kind of immediate work must be done because, if it is not done, the school cannot function. It may not be the most important work. It may not be the most critical work. But it is the work that cannot be put off, cannot wait, cannot be prioritized lower.

Leaders can be overwhelmed by this kind of work. Their leadership can be short-circuited by this tyranny of the immediate. When leadership cannot work itself out from under the pressures of what must be done to address what ought to be done, institutions can suffer from a lack of creativity, a dearth of energy and an absence of vision.

Good leaders free themselves from the tyranny of the immediate. They understand it and the cope with it. They put it as much behind them as they can, as readily as they can.

The tyranny of the immediate can sink a leader and inadequate leaders believe that addressing the immediate effectively is leadership in-and-of-itself.

It is not. It is simply tyranny and not that far from chaos.

Excellent leaders fight the tyranny of the immediate. And they win.