An inversion of expertise

Just finished watching four-star general, Stanley McChrystal's TED Talk and discussing with some school board members from around the state.  We talked a bit about our stereotype of the military compared to what McChrystal talked about.

First, that the leader is not the expert. McChrystal talked about the inversion of expertise; that the pace of change, particularly regarding communication tools, means that the leader needs to learn to be comfortable with the fact that he or she may not have the market cornered on technical expertise.  That instead, the leader needs to listen; that developing personal relationships is some of the most important work the leader can do; that others will bring important expertise to the table.

That diversity needs to be embraced.  The troops he leads are diverse--age, gender, experience.  You need to create a climate that uses experiences and skill sets of a diverse group of people.

So much of what McChrystal talked about applies to public education.  Our leaders must adapt to a new context, one where leadership means building relationships, not making all of the decisions from on high.

We need to engage with diverse stakeholders--both internal staff and external community.  We need to develop personal relationships.  And most of all, as leaders, we need to be willing to learn and to trust.

Surprising that this is the message of a military man.  I think that is what makes it so powerful for me.

Accentuate the positive

You've got to accentuate the positive
Eliminate the negative
Latch on to the affirmative
Don't mess with Mister In-Between
(Lyrics from a song made popular by Bing Crosby in the 1940s)

Positive? In today's competitive, supercharge environment, where there is no room for mistakes; no
time for do overs?

Well, it turns out that people are more productive when they focus on their strengths.  
Twenty-two percent of respondents indicated that they were likely to be disengaged when their 
manager primarily focused on their weaknesses. When their manager focused on their 
strengths, just one percent were like to be disengaged. (From Strengths Finders 2.0 by Tom
Rath).

If we expect our stakeholders to engage with us to solve the complex challenges we face, we need
to find ways to support, rather than criticize their efforts.

People who make predictions must have tons of confidence

I don't think I understand what is going to happen next week, let alone in the next ten years.

Still, it is fun and important to think about how the world is changing.  One thing IS certain:  the pace of change continues accelerate.   Are you ready for what may come your way?

Here is a list of changes that could affect public education:
10 Things That Will Be Obsolete In Education by 2020

What about adaptive leadership?

Okay, so the issue of technical leadership has been addressed.  According to the New York Times a deal has been struck.  Mayor Bloomberg will get a waiver to hire Cathleen P. Black as the next chancellor of the New York City Schools and Shael Polakow-Suransky will serve as Ms. Black's deputy.  Polakow-Suransky has the technical expertise Ms Black lacks.

Now, what about the adaptive leadership issue?  Can either Ms.Black or Mr. Polakow-Suransky lead the change effort required to transform New York's school system?  Technical expertise alone will not make it happen.

The challenge public education faces today, in New York and the rest of the country, is one that is not easily solved with technical expertise.  The problems are not simple and do not have easily identified answers. The challenges exist in chaos and uncertainty.  The public education system does not have the resources to tackle the problems on its own.  Solving the problems found in public education today requires leaders to use their communication skills to build relationships and create a context for others in the system to create solutions.

In fact, the public education system will not be successful on its own. Today's successful leaders understand that Collective Impact is needed, that collaboration across social systems is required for successful social change.

If the New York City school system is to experience that kind of social change, its top leaders need adaptive leadership skills. They must value building relationships, both within the school system and with other organizations that serve students and their families.

Our country has focused on the technical issues in public education for more than 40 years.  Little progress has been made.  It is time to start focusing on the adaptive aspects of the problems.

A debate over adaptive versus technical leadership

Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York City, recently appointed Cathleen Black as head of the New York City schools. Ms. Black is currently the chairwoman of Hearst Magazines, but has no experience leading a public education system.  This appointment has set off yet another debate over the issue of who is best suited to lead large, complex urban public education systems.  A number of experts weigh in on this debate in the New York Times Room for Debate: Who's qualified to run New York City schools?

What I find interesting is that most of the arguments against Ms. Black's appointment focus on her lack of technical expertise.  Only two of the debaters consider her adaptive leadership skills.

The country has focused on education reform for over forty years, yet the achievement gap stubbornly remains a problem.  Much of the focus of reform has been to improve the technical aspects of education.  Yet, much of the problem lies in the social aspects of education.  There is more involved than simply ensuring that curriculum is aligned to standards and highly qualified teachers work with our students, although these are important.

Education is a social enterprise.  And much of what doesn't work in our public schools is rooted in social failings, which often exist outside of our schools.  If we really want our schools to work better, we need to connect them to their larger context and work to improve that context.  If we want to see success we need to consider the collective impact  of all of the organizations in a community that focus on the social well being of its citizens.

Many of the posts on this blog point to the promise technology holds to help transform our schools.  Yet technology alone won't do it.  We need standards and curricula that align to those standards.  We need highly qualified, highly effective teachers in our classrooms.

Even more importantly, we need leaders who can develop relationships across the various (and often conflicting) stakeholders in our communities.  Creating a context that enables those closest to the problem to act is critical to the success of any leader, no matter what the sector.  The effort needs to be high tech and high touch.

Yes, technical expertise is important.   AND, adaptive leadership skills--listening, empathy, the ability to hold the space so the messy work of transformation can occur--are more important than ever.  We need to get off of the either/or argument.  It is a both/and.

What is Adaptive Change?

When I speak to school boards, I talk about leadership and explain that because the world, Wisconsin, and the expectations of public education have changed, we need to lead our school districts in a different way. Today, globalization and technology have combined to speed up the pace of change, changing the nature of our economy and connecting people in ways that were unimaginable just a few years ago.  Demographic and economic changes bring new challenges to the state.  The focus in public education has shifted from inputs to outputs, and the notion of “all children can learn” has been codified in public policy. 

Put all of this together and we see that the challenges we face today are complex.  And complex problems require a different leadership strategy.  Solving a complex problem is a lot like raising a child.  Expertise plays a role, yet the relationship you have with your child matters more.  Like every child, the challenges of complex problems are unique, and what works in one situation does not assure success in a similar situation.  Finally, outcomes remain uncertain, in spite of our best efforts. Complex challenges require more than technical leadership; they require adaptive leadership.  Complex challenges require different leadership strategies, yet leaders tend to address the challenges we face today as if they were technical in nature, and draw on strategies that do not work in adaptive change situations. 

When dealing with technical change, expertise rules the day.  Problems may be complicated, and require collaboration across disciplines; yet the resolution of the problem is clearly identifiable. For the most part, when we face technical challenges, we focus on improving processes, providing training to improve skills, and doing the right things right.  In other words, we know the answer; it is more a matter of implementation.  Leaders who can take charge tend to be successful when the problem is technical in nature. 

Adaptive changes require more than simply sharpening our processes and skills.  Instead, adaptive change challenges our beliefs and ways of thinking; and requires that we do things differently then we have in the past.  When leaders fail to recognize adaptive challenges, they tend to interpret staff behavior as resistance, when it is more likely that staff members are experiencing loss.  Asking staff to learn new skills or break old habits is difficult, especially for people who have been successful using traditional practices. 

For example, many school districts restrict cell phone use in school.  Ninety-three percent of people under the age of 30 possess cell phones, meaning most students possess a tool that could be used to access the Internet to enhance their learning.  Changing cell phone policies requires the adults in the system to think differently about students and their cell phones.  Rather than controlling and limiting cell phone use, staff need to consider the benefits, and develop learning opportunities for students to develop responsible cell phone use—and, need to accept that they have to relinquish some control to students.

Adaptive challenges require that people with the problem are part of the solution.  For example, in the cell phone scenario, a school board could change the cell phone policy and practices in the schools could remain unchanged.  Unless teachers and administrators understand how they could use cell phone technology to enhance learning, and believe that the change was worth the time and energy to change practices, things would stay the same.    In fact, it is likely that such a policy change would result in bigger problems.  Teachers may not feel the effort is worth it.  They may only imagine the problems that unrestricted student cell phone use would mean for them—ringing phones interrupting instruction; students accessing inappropriate sites or playing video games rather than working on school-related projects.  Students would believe (rightly) that they could use their cell phones in school, creating opportunities for conflict with staff that did not support or understand the policy change.

Understanding the importance of including the people with the problem would take the board in a different direction.   Rather than simply changing the policy, the board that understands the nature of adaptive change might provide opportunities for the staff to explore cell phone policy changes, include students and staff in the creation of guidelines for classroom use, provide professional development for staff so they could learn new techniques that would incorporate cell phone use.

For more than twenty years, education reform has focused on technical change—creating standards, aligning curriculum to the standards, creating accountability systems to monitor achievement.  Yet, in spite of these efforts, little progress has been made.  Many of the changes reflected in education reform challenge our beliefs and habits in addition to our technical skills.  Today’s leaders do not solve problems for people.  Instead, they provide opportunities for people to confront challenges and learn new methods; create a context where staff can safely confront uncertainty in spite of their discomfort, and adjust their values and perspectives to better develop solutions that address the complex challenges facing public education today.

Additional resources

Heifitz, Ronald A. and Linsky, Marty. (2002).  Leadership on the Line:  Staying Alive through the Dangers of Leading.  Boston:  Harvard Business School Press.

Heiftiz, Ronald A. and Laurie, Donald L. (2001).  The Work of Leadership. Harvard Business Review.

Patton, Michael Quinn.  (2007).  Deepening Extension’s Knowledge Base.  National Extension Association of Family and Consumer Sciences.  September 19, 2007.

Smith, Rolf. (1997).  Seven Levels of Change: Create, Innovate and Motivate with the Secrets of the World’s Largest Corporations.  Arlington, Texas:  Summit Publishing Group.