Category: Uncategorized

Managing dominant team members in meetings

Managing Dominant Team Members in Meetings

We’ve all been in team meetings where no one can get a word in edgeways due to dominant members of the team occupying the air space ! So why do some people feel the need to dominate and what can you do to address this ?

Effective team meetings are critical for fostering collaboration, making decisions, and driving projects forward. However, managing dominant team members can be a challenge, as their assertiveness may inadvertently stifle input from others, skew decision-making, or lead to frustration among quieter team members. By implementing strategic approaches grounded in research and best practices, leaders can create a more balanced and inclusive meeting environment. So why do certain people manifest dominance in meetings ?

Understanding Dominance in Team Dynamics

Dominance in meetings often manifests as frequent interruptions, monopolization of speaking time, or steering discussions towards personal interests. While dominant members may bring valuable insights and energy, their behavior can unintentionally overshadow the contributions of others, potentially diminishing the overall effectiveness of the group (Kozlowski & Ilgen, 2006). Certain individuals may act dominant in meetings due to personality traits, such as high extraversion or assertiveness, or as a response to perceived threats to their status within the group. Additionally, dominance can arise from a desire to control outcomes or ensure their ideas are heard, particularly in high-stakes scenarios (Anderson & Brion, 2014; Wisse & Sleebos, 2016).

Strategies to Manage Dominant Participants

  1. Set Clear Expectations Begin meetings with a clear agenda and ground rules. Establishing norms such as “one person speaks at a time” and “every voice matters” creates a framework for respectful interaction (Lehmann-Willenbrock et al., 2011). Additionally, distributing the agenda beforehand allows all members to prepare their contributions, reducing the likelihood of any single person dominating.
  2. Facilitate Balanced Participation The role of the facilitator is critical in managing team dynamics. Techniques such as round-robin sharing or directed questions can ensure equal participation. For example, asking, “Let’s hear from someone who hasn’t spoken yet,” invites input from quieter members (Kerr & Tindale, 2004).
  3. Use Structured Techniques Structured decision-making tools, like brainstorming followed by prioritization or the Nominal Group Technique, (NGT ) can help balance participation. The NGT is a process by which individuals first generate ideas independently, followed by a group discussion to prioritize these ideas. This ensures that all contributions are considered before dominant voices can overly influence the discussion (Van Breda, 2019).These methods encourage individual input before group discussion, reducing the influence of dominant voices.
  4. Leverage Nonverbal Cues None verbal cues can be powerful in managing behaviours (ask any teacher !) . Facilitators can use nonverbal communication to subtly manage dominance. Making eye contact with quieter members, gesturing towards them to speak, or gently interrupting dominant participants with phrases like, “Let’s pause here to get others’ thoughts,” can help redistribute speaking time.
  5. Provide Feedback and Coaching Addressing dominant behavior privately can lead to positive changes. Frame feedback constructively, focusing on the impact of their behavior and suggesting alternative ways to contribute. For instance, say, “Your enthusiasm is valuable, but I’d like to ensure others have the opportunity to share their perspectives as well” (Hackman, 2002).
  6. Cultivate Psychological Safety Psychological safety—the belief that one can speak up without fear of negative consequences—is essential for inclusive meetings. Leaders should model vulnerability, acknowledge diverse viewpoints, and actively encourage participation from all members. (Allen et al, 2023)

Managing dominant team members requires a proactive and empathetic approach. By setting clear expectations, facilitating balanced participation, and fostering a culture of psychological safety, leaders can create a meeting environment where all voices are heard and valued. This not only enhances decision-making but also strengthens team cohesion and morale.

References

  • Anderson, C., & Brion, S. (2014). Perspectives on power in organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 67-97.
  • Allen, J, A. Lehmann-Willenbrock, The Key Features of workplace meetings: Conceptualising the why, how and what of meetings at work, Organisational Psychology Review, London Sage.
  • Delbecq, A. L., Van de Ven, A. H., & Gustafson, D. H. (1975). Group techniques for program planning: A guide to nominal group and Delphi processes. Scott, Foresman.
  • Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
  • Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Harvard Business Press.
  • Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, R. S. (2004). Group performance and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 623-655.
  • Kozlowski, S. W., & Ilgen, D. R. (2006). Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 7(3), 77-124.
  • Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Meinecke, A. L., Rowold, J., & Kauffeld, S. (2011). How transformational leadership works during team interactions: Insights from a video-based field study. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(6), 1013-1024.
  • Wisse, B., & Sleebos, E. (2016). When the dark ones gain power: Perceived position power strengthens the effect of supervisor Machiavellianism on abusive supervision in work teams. Personality and Individual Differences, 99, 122-126.

Are we allowing our introverts to shine in interviews ?

Interviews are still a key element within recruitment processes, but approaches used in interviews, disadvantage many good candidates, including those that display more introverted behaviours. So what is introversion and why might this happen ?

Introversion: A Brief Description

Introversion is a personality trait characterized by a preference for solitary or minimally stimulating environments, with a tendency to focus on internal thoughts and emotions rather than external stimuli. Introverts often find social interactions draining and require time alone to recharge, unlike extroverts who apparently gain energy from socializing. This does not imply that introverts are antisocial; rather, they prefer meaningful, smaller-scale interactions to large groups or high-energy social settings (Baxter et al , 2024).

Psychological research suggests that introversion exists on a spectrum, often assessed using personality frameworks such as the Big Five, where it contrasts with extroversion (McCrae & Costa, 1987). Introverts are typically reflective, introspective, and attentive to details, which can make them adept at creative and analytical tasks (Laney, 2002). Biological factors may contribute to introversion, with studies indicating that introverts exhibit higher cortical arousal, influencing their preference for quieter environments (Eysenck, 1967). However, many people may self-identify as introverts, without ever having completed psychometric testing. In these cases, their introversion has emerged via socio cultural routes, coloured by the perceptions of others. These perceptions have, over time, influenced their self perceptions, concomitantly influencing the ways in which they interpret their own strengths and weaknesses (Baxter et al , 2024).

Cultural perceptions of introversion vary; some societies, particularly in the West, may undervalue introverted traits, favoring extroverted ideals. Yet, understanding introversion’s strengths can foster inclusivity and appreciation of diverse personality types.

Interviews and bias

Job interviews often favour extroverted candidates, unintentionally side-lining introverts due to the way they’re structured and evaluated. Many interview processes reward assertiveness, quick thinking, and overt enthusiasm—qualities typically associated with extroversion. Meanwhile, introverts, who may excel in preparation, thoughtfulness, and deep focus, can be perceived as less confident or engaged, even if they’re just being authentic ; this is what is termed, ‘an extroverted deficit belief.’ (Lawn et al, 2019).

Group interviews are particularly challenging for introverts, as such settings often reward candidates who dominate discussions or quickly respond, leaving introverts at a disadvantage as their neural pathways differ from those of extroverts- they are longer, meaning they take longer to process information (Cunningham et al, 2019 )Additionally, body language expectations like constant eye contact or overly animated gestures can feel unnatural for an introvert, leading interviewers to mistakenly perceive them as unengaged (Baxter et al, 2024).

Bias

Unconscious bias can also creep in. Many recruiters, often extroverts themselves, might unknowingly prefer candidates who mirror their own communication styles . This can overshadow the valuable strengths introverts bring, such as listening skills, analytical thinking, and a capacity for independent work (Dane et al, ).

To combat this bias, interviewers should focus on the substance of responses, allow adequate reflection time, and recognize the diverse ways candidates can demonstrate enthusiasm and competence. This may mean doing away with traditional mechanisms such as presentations or on the spot questions. Allowing advance preparation time can be key. In short, there are 10 key ways that recruiters can allow introverts to shine in interviews:

Ten Key Strategies to Help Introverts Shine in Interviews

  1. Provide Advance Notice
    Share the interview format and potential questions ahead of time. This allows introverts to prepare thoughtful and detailed responses.
  2. Encourage Preparation
    Remind candidates they can bring notes or examples of past achievements to reference during the conversation.
  3. Offer Reflection Time
    Avoid putting candidates on the spot with rapid-fire questions. Allow moments for them to think before answering.
  4. Focus on Depth, Not Just Speed
    Value the substance of answers over how quickly they’re delivered. Introverts often excel at giving well-considered responses.
  5. Adapt Interview Styles
    Use a one-on-one or small-panel format instead of group interviews, which can feel overwhelming for introverts.
  6. Create a Comfortable Environment
    Minimize unnecessary distractions or overly formal settings to help candidates feel at ease.
  7. Ask Open-Ended Questions
    Use questions that invite elaboration, such as “Can you share an example of…” to help introverts showcase their skills.
  8. Balance Verbal and Non-Verbal Cues
    Understand that introverts may not display high-energy body language but can convey enthusiasm in other ways, like precise language.
  9. Acknowledge Diverse Communication Styles
    Appreciate calm, measured responses and avoid interpreting them as disinterest.
  10. Provide Follow-Up Opportunities
    Offer a chance for candidates to share additional thoughts after the interview, which aligns with their reflective nature.

In failing to recognise introverted preferences and strong points, recruiters are failing to provide inclusive recruitment strategies. In the longer term this has a negative effect not only on candidates but in acquisition of talent more broadly.

Baxer, J., Patent, V., & Winter, A. (2024). Does Self-perceived introversion create a barrier to leadership emergence in Higher Education: a case study approach. In S.Huber (Ed.), The International Handbook for Governance, Leadership, Administration, and Management in Education Geneva: Palgrave.

Cunningham, G. B., & Ahn, N. Y. (2019). The role of bias in the under-representation of women in leadership po sitions Routledge Handbook of the Business of Women’s Sport (pp. 83-94): Routledge.

Dane, P. B., Madelynn, R. D. S., & Shelley, D. D. Righting the balance: Understanding introverts (and extraverts) in the workplace. International Journal of Management Reviews. doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12268

Lawn, R. B., Slemp, G. R., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2019). Quiet flourishing: The authenticity and well-being of trait introverts living in the west depends on extraversion-deficit beliefs. Journal of Happiness Studies, 20(7), 2055-2075.

Rudolf, S., Cornelius, J. K., & Yannik, Z. Executive Search Consultants’ Biases Against Women (or Men?). Frontiers in psychology. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.541766

Resources and blog posts relating to introverted leadership and inclusive practices.

Management Today: https://www.managementtoday.co.uk/does-introvert-hamper-chances-making-senior-management/personal-development/article/1811100:Does being an introvert hamper your chances of making senior management?

Do the HEXACO TEST AT : https://hexaco.org/scaledescriptions

BBC Ideas : BBC Ideas Programme, Writer and voiceover, https://www.bbc.co.uk/ideas/videos/the-power-of-quiet-leadership/p0929tnh now with 168 thousand views.

Academic identities project resources

The Pitfalls of People-Pleasing in Female Leadership in the public and third sectors

Photo by Canva Studio on Pexels.com

In the realm of leadership, there’s a pervasive misconception that being agreeable and accommodating to everyone is a sure path to success. This tendency to prioritize others’ needs over one’s own, known as people-pleasing, is often glorified, especially when it comes to women in leadership roles. However, a deeper examination reveals that people-pleasing is fundamentally incompatible with effective leadership, particularly for women striving to break through the glass ceiling.

What is People-Pleasing?

People-pleasing is a behaviour characterized by an excessive need for approval and a fear of rejection or conflict. It involves prioritizing the desires and expectations of others over one’s own needs and desires. While it may seem like a harmless trait, especially in a society that values harmony and cooperation, it can have detrimental effects, particularly in leadership positions. In many ways it is written in our DNA: In anthropological terms, it was necessary for women to be useful to a tribe in a way that men were not, so people pleasing was a sure fire way to keep in with the tribe !

Both people-pleasing and perfectionism stem from a fear of inadequacy and rejection, perpetuating a cycle of striving for acceptance through constant achievement and perfection. This leads to a never-ending pursuit where no amount of effort seems enough. The focus on pleasing others creates a divide between one’s true self and the persona presented to the world, resulting in a loss of authenticity and self-awareness. The approval gained from pleasing others fails to alleviate internal doubts and anxieties, as it is based on a false representation. Consequently, individuals lose touch with their genuine preferences, beliefs, and values, as they prioritize meeting external expectations. People-pleasing and perfectionism act as shields, obscuring the true self and hindering personal growth and fulfillment. Breaking free from these patterns requires embracing authenticity and prioritizing self-awareness over external validation.

In the context of female leadership, the pressure to be likable and accommodating is often magnified. Women in leadership roles are frequently expected to navigate a delicate balance between assertiveness and nurturing, all while contending with societal stereotypes and biases. As a result, many women succumb to the temptation to prioritize harmony over confrontation, leading them down the slippery slope of people-pleasing.

Why People-Pleasing is Incompatible with Good Leadership

At first glance, people-pleasing may appear to foster positive relationships and teamwork. However, beneath the surface lies a host of problems that can undermine effective leadership for example:

  • Loss of Authenticity: Constantly seeking approval from others can erode a leader’s sense of self and authenticity. By prioritizing others’ expectations over their own values and principles, leaders risk losing sight of who they truly are and what they stand for.
  • Inability to Make Tough Decisions: Effective leadership often requires making difficult decisions that may not be popular with everyone. People-pleasers, fearing backlash or disapproval, may shy away from making these tough calls, leading to indecision and stagnation within the organization.
  • Undermined Authority: Leaders who constantly seek validation from their team members may struggle to command respect and authority. Employees may perceive them as weak or indecisive, undermining their ability to lead effectively.
  • Stifled Innovation: Innovation thrives in environments where diverse perspectives are encouraged and dissenting opinions are welcomed. However, a culture of people-pleasing stifles creativity and innovation by discouraging constructive criticism and honest feedback.
  • Burnout and Resentment: Being a female leader and a people-pleaser can have significant consequences for wellbeing. Constantly striving to meet others’ expectations while neglecting one’s own needs can lead to heightened stress, anxiety, and burnout. Female leaders may find themselves caught in a cycle of overwork as they attempt to juggle the demands of leadership with the desire to please everyone. This relentless pursuit of approval can take a toll on both mental and physical health, leading to exhaustion, sleep disturbances, and decreased resilience. Moreover, the pressure to maintain a façade of perfection can exacerbate feelings of impostor syndrome and undermine self-confidence. Additionally, the internal conflict between authenticity and conformity can create a sense of dissonance, leaving female leaders feeling disconnected from their true selves. This lack of alignment with one’s values and beliefs can erode self-esteem and contribute to feelings of emptiness or dissatisfaction. In the long term, the negative impact on wellbeing can extend beyond the individual to affect relationships, job performance, and overall quality of life. It’s essential for female leaders to prioritize self-care, set boundaries, and seek support to mitigate the harmful effects of people-pleasing on their wellbeing.

Moving Towards Authentic Leadership

Authentic leadership for women involves aligning actions with personal values, fostering genuine connections, and embracing vulnerability (Northouse, 2015). It emphasizes transparency, self-awareness, and integrity, allowing female leaders to inspire trust and loyalty (Avolio & Gardner, 2005). By embracing authenticity, women leaders cultivate a supportive and inclusive work culture, where individuals feel empowered to express themselves and contribute fully (Gardner et al., 2011). This approach fosters collaboration, innovation, and employee engagement, leading to improved organizational performance and greater job satisfaction (Walumbwa et al., 2008). Ultimately, authentic leadership enables women to lead with confidence and make a meaningful impact on their teams and organizations.

Breaking free from the people-pleasing trap requires a conscious effort to cultivate authenticity, assertiveness, and self-confidence. Female leaders, in particular, must challenge societal norms and stereotypes, embracing their unique strengths and leadership styles. By prioritizing open communication, fostering a culture of accountability, and leading by example, women can redefine leadership on their own terms.

So… while the temptation to people-please may be strong, particularly for women in leadership roles, it ultimately undermines the very essence of effective leadership. By embracing authenticity, assertiveness, and self-confidence, female leaders can chart a new course towards more inclusive, innovative, and sustainable leadership practices.

10 Ways to Stop being a people pleasing leader

  1. Set Boundaries: Clearly define your limits and communicate them assertively to your team. Be firm in saying no to requests or tasks that don’t align with your priorities or values.
  • Practice Self-Reflection: Take time to reflect on your motivations and behaviors. Identify instances where you’ve prioritized others’ needs over your own and explore alternative responses.
  • Develop Assertiveness Skills: Learn to express your thoughts, opinions, and needs confidently and respectfully. Practice assertive communication techniques to assert your boundaries and preferences without being overly aggressive or passive.
  • Delegate Responsibility: Trust your team members to take on tasks and make decisions independently. Delegating responsibilities not only empowers your team but also frees up time for you to focus on strategic priorities.
  • Focus on Impact: Shift your focus from seeking approval to making a positive impact. Prioritize actions and decisions based on their potential to benefit the organization and stakeholders rather than solely seeking validation.
  • Embrace Constructive Feedback: Welcome feedback from others, even if it’s critical. Use feedback as an opportunity for growth and learning rather than taking it personally or feeling the need to defend yourself.
  • Practice Self-Care: Prioritize your well-being by taking care of your physical, mental, and emotional health. Schedule regular breaks, engage in activities you enjoy, and seek support from friends, family, or a mentor.
  • Cultivate Authentic Relationships: Foster genuine connections with your team based on trust, respect, and mutual understanding. Authentic relationships encourage open communication and collaboration, reducing the need for people-pleasing behaviors.
  • Stay True to Your Values: Align your actions with your core values and principles. Make decisions that reflect your beliefs, even if they may not be popular or well-received by everyone.

Seek Professional Development: Invest in leadership development programs or coaching to enhance your leadership skills and confidence. Surround yourself with supportive peers and mentors who can provide guidance and encouragement as you navigate away from people-pleasing tendencies

References:

Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2010). Social Identity Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances. Springer Science & Business Media.

Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2007). Women and the labyrinth of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 85(9), 62-71.

Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(3), 491.

Morin, A. (2015). 13 Things Mentally Strong People Don’t Do: Take Back Your Power, Embrace Change, Face Your Fears, and Train Your Brain for Happiness and Success. William Morrow Paperbacks

    Why keep a dog and bark yourself ? The pitfalls of Micromanagement: Unraveling Causes, Consequences, and Employee Countermeasures

    Micromanagement, leadership approach characterized by excessive control and supervision, has long been a subject of concern in organizations worldwide. This article delves into the reasons behind leaders’ inclination to micromanage, the detrimental effects it has on both employees and the work environment, and provides some steps employees can take to address the issue.

     The 5 Key reasons why Leaders micromanage:

    • Trust and Control: Some leaders may struggle with trust issues or fear of failure, leading them to micromanage as a means of maintaining control over outcomes.
    • Perfectionism: A desire for perfection and attention to detail can push leaders to micromanage, believing that their input is crucial for achieving flawless results.
    • Lack of Confidence: Insecure leaders may feel the need to be involved in every decision and task, fearing that relinquishing control could expose their weaknesses.
    • Communication Gaps: Insufficient clarity or lack of effective communication within teams can drive leaders to micromanage to ensure tasks are executed as intended.
    • Personal Attachment: Leaders who have poured substantial effort into a project or task may find it difficult to delegate, resulting in micromanagement tendencies.

    The Consequences of Micromanagement:

    The consequences of micromanagement can be severe: employee demoralization-when constant monitoring and interference erodes employees’ motivation, job satisfaction, and self-confidence. This leads them to feel undervalued, leading to stress and burnout; Stifled creativity and innovation-micromanagement-this restricts staff autonomy and stifles their ability to think creatively or explore alternative solutions, hampering innovation within the organization, hindering growth and skill development: Lack of ownership -employees are deprived of the opportunity to take ownership of their work and develop new skills, hampering professional growth and limiting their potential; Reduced productivity- micromanagement consumes significant time and energy, diverting focus away from critical tasks, and employees become disengaged, leading to decreased productivity and compromised organizational performance: High turnover and talent loss-the negative impact of micromanagement often drives talented employees to seek more empowering work environments, leading to increased turnover rates and the loss of valuable human capital.

    What can you do if you are being micromanaged ?

    There are 5 key actions you can take if you are being micromanaged:

    1. Engage in open dialogue with the micromanaging leader, expressing concerns and requesting more autonomy and trust. Constructive feedback can help raise awareness about the impact of their behaviour.
    2. Establish Boundaries: Clearly define roles, responsibilities, and expectations. Proactively communicate progress, plans, and milestones to ensure transparency and minimize micromanagement tendencies.
    3. Demonstrate Competence: Prove your capabilities and competence through high-quality work, meeting deadlines, and taking ownership of assigned tasks. Building trust and confidence can gradually reduce the need for micromanagement.
    4. Seek Feedback: Actively seek feedback and guidance from the micromanaging leader. By demonstrating a commitment to learning and improvement, you can foster a collaborative environment and potentially mitigate micromanagement.
    5. Suggest Alternatives: Propose alternative approaches to demonstrate your ability to think critically and provide valuable insights. This can help shift the focus from constant monitoring to shared decision-making

    Micromanagement can have far-reaching consequences for both employees and organizations and understanding the underlying causes of micromanagement is crucial for employees to navigate and address this issue effectively. By fostering open communication, setting boundaries, and showcasing competence, you can strive to reduce micromanagement tendencies, foster a healthier work environment, and unleash you full potential.

    Allan, J., & Rogelberg, S. (2017). Encyclopedia of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. SAGE Publications.

    Erkutlu, H., & Chafra, J. (2018). A Comprehensive Literature Review of Micro-Managers and Micromanagement. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepreneurship, 23(1), 62-75.

    Kaur, R., & Mathur, A. (2017). Effects of Micromanagement on Employee Engagement: The Mediating Role of Psychological Ownership. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 52(2), 219-232.

    Rigby, D. K., & Bilodeau, B. (2018). Avoiding the Traps of Micromanagement. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2018/01/avoiding-the-traps-of-micromanagement

    Digital strategy in secondary education: going forward or moving backwards ?

    Following lockdowns in 2020 due to Covid-19, schools needed to find a way to ensure the education of their pupils. In order to do this, they engaged in digital learning, to varying extents. Innovations emanated from all school staff including for example: teachers, leaders,  and teaching assistants. Some were already innovating in this area and brought forward and implemented, digital strategies, whilst others engaged with digital learning for the first time. While research is emerging about the effects of the pandemic restrictions on pupils and staff in relation to key issues such as mental health and educational attainment, very little is known about the impact on school leaders’ strategic planning processes. To address this gap, we launched a UKRI funded study adopting a strategy as learning approach to report on 50 qualitative interviews with school leaders to examine digital strategy in English secondary schools, before, during. and after July 2021, when restrictions were lifted in England. The project draws on  strategy as learning literature to evaluate if schools have changed their strategic planning for digital learning, as a direct response to having learned and innovated during the pandemic. The study concludes that there is evidence that digital innovations during the pandemic have changed the ways in which leaders think about their digital strategy, thus supporting a strategy as learning approach. However it also concludes that although there is ample evidence that the pandemic has changed the way many schools view digital learning, that, for some schools, there remain persistent barriers to digital integration and planning. These emanate both from material and cultural considerations, as well as leader vision and belief in digital learning.

    You can find out more on the project website at: https://www.open.ac.uk/projects/leading-online-learning/

    Leading online learning: Out of crisis comes opportunity

    Strategic management of online learning during Covid and beyond.

    Dr Jacqueline Baxter is Associate Professor in Public Policy and Management and Director for the Centre of Innovation in Online Business and Legal Education (SCILAB). She is Principal Fellow of The Higher Education Academy, Fellow of The Academy of Social Sciences and Elected Council Member of Belmas. She has been Editor in Chief  of the Sage Journal Management in Education (MiE) for 4 years. Her current funded research projects examine the interrelationship between trust, accountability and capacity in improving learning outcomes; and the strategic management of online learning in secondary schools during and beyond Covid19. Dr Baxter is based in The department of Public Leadership and Social Enterprise at the Open University Business School. She tweets @drjacqueBaxter and her profile can be found at : http://www.open.ac.uk/people/jab899. Her latest book is: Trust, Accountability and Capacity in Education System Reform (Routledge, 2020).

    Leading online learning: Out of crisis comes opportunity.

    We are just entering the pilot stage of our research project which looks at how schools have strategically managed online learning during Covid, and if and how, new experiences during lockdown have created long term sustainable changes in relation to the way education is managed and delivered. One of our key research questions investigates whether changes and new ways of doing things, implemented during Covid, are going to have a long-term effect on schools’ vision of education to come.

    It is undisputed, that Covid has had a massive impact on education and the way it is delivered, both in the UK and internationally. Whilst there have been a number of papers on the ways in which teachers have innovated during this time, and the impact this has had on their workload and mental health, there has been little on how school leaders and their senior teams have taken a strategic overview of online and blended learning.

    This is an important are to explore for several reasons: The first relates to the introduction of a more intensive regime of online teaching, one that has been forced on schools, unusually not by government, but by circumstance. The way that this has taken place, without preparation, training, or any sort of upgrade to school infrastructure, is in itself fascinating: not only in relation to the challenges that schools have faced and how they have dealt with them, but equally, the opportunity that such change presents. Schools are used to a raft of policy innovation: changes to their practices, procedures, and to the very nature of education: Policies imposed by successive governments, each more eager than the last to prove that they can close that elusive achievement gap, that for many years has proved intractable in the face of policy innovation, and inimical to social mobility, particularly in class dominated England (Weis and Dolby, 2012). The second, is in relation to the way that schools have worked with parents and carers to ensure provision during these the most testing times (Jewitt et al., 2021).

    Since the Academy Act of 2010 schools have become increasingly distant from their communities (Baxter and Cornforth, 2019). This is particularly true of Multi-Academy trusts-groups of schools managed by boards and CEOs- that research has illustrated, are often remote and out of touch with school communities (Greany and Higham, 2018). Increasingly standardised practice of teaching, pedagogy and curriculum, imposed across what have become vast multilevel organisations, has created a new educational landscape within what is often termed, ‘the system less system of English education’(Lawn, 2013). The third reason why our approach potentially rich, is in relation to the long-term sustainability of good practices brought about by the pandemic. Certainly, one of its by products, is that it has revealed the stark reality of successive financial cuts to education that have been brought about by government, particularly since 2010 (Gray and Barford, 2018): Covid has brought this into the public eye, in such a way as to make it almost impossible for government to ignore. Shortages of hardware, weaknesses in school infrastructure, and last but by no means least, the chronic shortage of food experienced by many families living on and below the breadline, have been headline news since the pandemic began.

    These factors have created a unique environment (all albeit a very testing one), for school leaders and their senior teams. Stripped bare of the usual rounds of consultation before introduction of new policies and practices, school leaders and their teams have had to innovate and create, in order to provide the impetus needed to steer schools and their learners through stormy waters.

     It is said that the only real change in society emerges at times of crisis, According to the free market fundamentalist Milton freedman, ‘Only a crisis – actual or perceived – produces real change. When that crisis occurs, the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around.’  Covid has and is, along with climate change, one of the most pressing issues of our time. It seems impossible to imagine that education can emerge from this to the ‘same old, same old.’ Our initial interviews with school leaders have started to reveal some of the new;  certainly there is evidence of huge progress even in the short time between lockdown in early 2020, and the one in which we find ourselves at present.  Echoing an ancient quote on action during crisis:  

    ‘ You start by doing what is necessary; then do what’s possible; and suddenly you are doing the impossible.’ (St Francis of Assisi).

    Similarly, our project will investigate the necessary, look at the innovations of the possible, and finally, point to how the seemingly impossible may profoundly change education and the way we deliver it.

    Our pilot report will launch in late April, followed by our interim policy briefing in June, you can find out more about the project on our website at http://business-school.open.ac.uk/news/oubs-leads-ground-breaking-project or follow us on Twitter at: @ https://twitter.com/Covid_EduLeader

    Baxter JA and Cornforth C. (2019) Governing collaborations: how boards engage with their communities in multi-academy trusts in England. Public Management Review: 1-23.

    Gray M and Barford A. (2018) The depths of the cuts: the uneven geography of local government austerity. Cambridge journal of regions, economy and society 11: 541-563.

    Greany T and Higham R. (2018) Hierarchy, markets and networks: analysing the’self-improving school-led system’agenda in England and the implications for schools.

    Jewitt K, Baxter J and Floyd A. (2021) Literature review on the use of online and blended learning during Covid 19 and Beyond. The Open University The Open University

    Lawn M. (2013) A Systemless System. Forthcoming.

    Weis L and Dolby N. (2012) Social class and education: Global perspectives: Routledge.

    ~The Art of Quiet leadership

    This post first appeared on the OpenLearn Website : https://www.open.edu/openlearn/money-business/leadership-management/quiet-leadership-post-covid-world

    The last ten years have seen the rise of populist leaders, characterised by their extroverted ‘style before substance’ self-promotion approach.

    Individuals such as Donald Trump; Boris Johnson and Jair Bolsonaro, promote the ideal of the pushy extroverted leader, who speaks without thinking, reacts rapidly and excitedly and changes tack frequently.

    For some time now there has been a general perception that you are better off in the workplace, and as a leader, if you have extrovert tendencies: In other words, if you are ‘boastful and booming’ rather than ‘contemplative and calm’. But research on quiet more introverted styles of leadership has shown that introverts may be far better suited to today’s challenges.

    Introversion Vs extroversion

    The perception that extroverted individuals make better leaders, is influenced by the fact that there are more extroverts in leadership positions, combined with the fact that extroverts are much more likely to tell you how good they are. The traits of extroversion and introversion, first introduced by the famous psychologist Carl Jung, are generally characterised by garrulous outgoing and energetic behaviours in extroverts, whereas introverted characters are more likely to be calm, reflective and often prefer the written to the spoken medium.

    In actual fact, according to most personality tests that set out to measure these tendencies, behaviours are more often placed on a continuum rather than being confined to one extreme or the other: Ambiversion-the ability to shift between introverted and extroverted behaviours, is very common, for example, salespeople that on one hand, need to listen deeply, on the other, talk enthusiastically about their products (Kahnweiler, 2009,p, 3). …studies found that extrovert’s positive outlook can make them more resilient to stress…

    Some studies, such as one that looked at extroversion in the workplace from a multiple countries perspective, found that extroverts are more likely to rise to leadership positions due to a greater motivation to achieve external goals, such as a promotion or increased salary. These studies found that extrovert’s positive outlook can make them more resilient to stress and more likely to bounce back from failure, both recognized qualities of strong leaders (Ledesma, 2014).  

    But according to Susan Cain, author of the bestselling book ‘Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that can’t stop talking’, society as a whole undervalues introverts, particularly as leaders. She argues that without introverts we wouldn’t have leadership achievements such as The Apple computer, or theory of relativity – Steve Jobs and Albert Einstein were both introverts.Graphic of introverts VS ExtrovertsCopyrighted image IconFigure 1 Adapted from information in (Kahnweiler, 2009)

    The power of the introverted quiet leader

    So what do introverts bring to leadership positions and how can they overcome their key challenges?

    Research shows that introverts can bring a great deal to the table in leadership positions: they are more likely to listen and process the ideas of their team; they consider ideas deeply before acting; they are humble and more likely to credit their team for ideas and performance; they express themselves and their ideas well in writing and because their motivation generally comes from within, are less likely to compromise performance in seeking rewards such as money or power.

    For this reason, their judgement is less likely to be compromised through excitement or promise of rich rewards.  However, there is a downside: Many western societies, including the US, have long favoured extroverted behaviours: Psychologist, Robert McCrae created a map of the world, showing the extent to which, different countries favour introverted or extroverted qualities (McCrae & Terracciano, 2005). Asian /oriental societies erred on the side of favouring introverted qualities whilst Western cultures revealed the opposite.

    However, the Western predilection to favour extroversion has resulted in many leadership courses, such as MBAs being structured to favour extroverted activities such as; talking about achievements or large group presentations. These can leave introverted students feeling they lack the qualities necessary for ‘good leadership’.

    So what are introverts key challenges and how do should they overcome them?

    Jennifer Kahnweiler’s studies into leadership challenges for introverts revealed six key factors which can hold introverts back from rising to leadership postiions:

    1. People exhaustion (draining of energy due to too many people contact)
    2. Fast pace (leaving little time for reflection)
    3. Interruptions (particularly difficult given our ‘always on’ world)
    4. A pressure to self-promote
    5. An emphasis on teamwork
    6. An aversion towards negative impressions (introverts’ facial expression doesn’t often reveal their emotion as readily as extroverts)

    She advocates a 4 Ps Process to overcome these challenges:

    Preparation

    Try to prepare in advance for people heavy situations such as meetings, create your questions when you have time to think about them

    Presence

    Show people, you are present by showing you are interested and aware through making eye contact or asking a question

    Push

    Push yourself out of your comfort zone as often as possible: more pain more gain!  

    Practice 

    Practice new behaviours such as telling stories, public speaking

    Yet today’s world seems to demand extroverted qualities more than ever: leaders are expected to respond rapidly to increasingly complex scenarios; news travels faster than ever in an ‘always-on world,’ so why do we need more introverts in leadership positions?

    Introverted leaders for the future

    Introverted leaders have a great deal to offer in our complex and increasingly chaotic world: The creativity and staying power of introverts are vital to solving long term problems such as climate change or the increased possibility of worldwide viruses such as Covid19, which emerge due to complex social and ecological factors.

    In addition, introverts recognize fellow introverts- introverts makeup 40-60% of the workforce if they are undervalued or not recognised, as is often the case if their leader is an extrovert, they are more likely to leave.

    Finally, leaders cannot resolve complex problems without listening to their experts, failure to do so has been a leitmotif of populist leaders whose performance at controlling covid19 has been little short of catastrophic. Given these factors, it could well be the day of the populist extrovert is over and the time for the reflective quiet leader, is indeed upon us.  

    Multi Academy Trusts in England , are they really accountable ?

    This article first appeared on Discover Society at :https://discoversociety.org/2018/08/01/multi-academy-trusts-in-england-are-they-really-accountable/

     

    Since the 1988 Education Act changed the educational landscape in England, heralding a new era of school self-management, the changes to English education have continued at a pace that is without precedent within other developed democracies. This has led many to describe it as ‘the lab of Europe.’ One of the most profound changes to take place has been the introduction of the academies programme in which schools, formerly overseen by Local Education Authorities (LEAs), have converted (or been coerced to convert following poor performance at an Ofsted inspection) to become semi-autonomous state subsidised schools in the form of Academies.

    Operational drivers, such as the need to combine in order to cost effectively buy in services once provided by LEAs, combined with research that implies that inter school collaboration contributes positively to student progress, (Chapman et al 2009; NCTL, 2013), have also resulted in the creation of Academy Chains, Multi Academy Trusts and other less formal forms of collaboration between schools. As the literature on multi-level governance in the public and third sector reveals, (Foss et al, 2010), providing effective governance and accountability for complex collaborative organizations, which may also be widely geographically dispersed, creates a number of accountability challenges for organizations and the governance of such organizations.

    Accountability past and present
    Until 1988 the system of Educational accountability in England was focused on the LEA combined with an inspection system known as HMI – Her Majesty’s Inspectorate. The LEA combined their monitoring role with one which included both educational and pedagogic support with supply of back office services. Specialist advisers, very often subject specific, would work with schools and teachers to improve performance. HMI carried out regular inspections of schools, both general and thematic, in order to evaluate the quality of teaching and learning.  This changed in 1992 when, prompted by John Major’s Citizen Charter, and accompanied by broader international trends premised on the rationale of public choice theory, Ofsted – The (then) Office for Standards in Education replaced the collegiality of HMI with a high stakes form of inspection and regulation. The system also introduced use of school league tables to evaluate the quality of schools. This too formed part of a broader educational trend that has become known as ‘Governing by numbers’.

    A changing system
    The introduction of the academies programme under the Blair administration, originally offered freedom from LEA control (both financial and curricular), for failing schools in the London region. The programme was so successful that it was extended to other schools, at first on a meritocratic basis- only successful schools could apply to convert – but following the Academies Act in 2010, the programme was intensified and schools were offered substantial financial incentives to convert. Over time this began to radically change the educational landscape as more schools were either incentivised, or in the case of failing schools, were coerced into conversion, following unfavourable judgements by Ofsted. Ofsted’s remit was increased to incorporate inspection of whole Education Authorities (LEAs), a good number of which, were found to be failing.

    This also coincided with a dramatic reduction in LEA funding, justified by austerity policies, which effectively undermined their capacity to offer its former wide range of services to schools remaining under LEA control. Although, in response to widespread protest, the government subsequently did a u-turn in terms of turning the plans into legislation, (Whittaker, 2016); there is little doubt that, in practice, they have not deviated from their plans and the number of schools joining MATs continues to rise. In November 2017 there were over 20,100 state funded schools in England, of these 6100 were academies with 1668 standalone academies and 4,432 MATs. MATs may have anything from 2 to over 100 schools.

    The accountability maze
    Since then the system of accountability has become increasingly complex, diluted and fragmented as figure 1 illustrates.

    MATs are regulated financially by the EFA (Education funding Agency), their expansion is overseen by 8 regional schools commissioners and their schools are inspected by Ofsted. However, Ofsted are not permitted to inspect MATs as a whole. This means that they cannot inspect /monitor boards at the apex of the organization- trust boards and their CEOs. In addition to this, their regions (and regional directorates) do not coincide with the RSC regions, thus, there is little joined up approach between them. This has been widely criticised by both the Education Select Committee (Parliament, 2017), and in numerous press reports, particularly in light of the increasing number of MAT failures.

    The pressure on good MATs to expand is enormous. Regional Schools Commissioners are under a great deal of pressure to re-broker (find a new sponsor) for poor schools, and as LEAs are increasingly unable to cope with the many demands placed on them, schools turn to MATS for support (J.  Baxter, 2018). In addition to this, due to the complex multi-level governance structures within MATs, they are having to work very hard and creatively to ensure that they are in touch with their school communities (Baxter, 2018). A recent report by the Education Select Committee questioned the rationale behind MAT expansion in light of the numerous MAT failures that have recently been in the press (see Baxter, 2018).

    The pressure of accountability emanates from a number of sources: from the high stakes inspection system that considers schools within MATs in a fragmented way; Regional Schools Commissioners, keen to add failing schools to MAT portfolios and from the Education Funding Agency, who monitor MAT finances. Unfortunately, the unrelenting pressures on MATs to prove that their model is the best one, is a key pressure within the highly marketized system of English education. And leading to lack of collaboration between MATs, as one MAT CEO put it: ‘MATs don’t share, they compete against each other.’

    Managing and governing collaborative organizations is no mean feat, as the literature on collaborative advantage illustrates (see for example, Vangen, Hayes, & Cornforth, 2015). Even when all of the collaborating organizations are keen for it to work, the challenges of factors such as: the creation of a coherent organizational identity; ensuring that the tension between conformity and autonomy of organizations within the group is well managed, and, ensuring that internal as well as external accountability is clear and productive- i.e. that it works towards the organizational mission and not against it; are demanding of the most able management and leadership teams.

    The English system of education after 30 years of government tinkering, is in a very difficult place. Support and accountability systems provided by the LEA are in many cases either gone or so deprived of funding, due to cuts and academy conversions that they have little or no capacity to support or provide local accountability. Ofsted, for so many years the schools’ ‘watchdog’, no longer has the capacity or the skills to inspect these new structures. The vast cash injection it would take in order to train up inspectors to oversee MAT boards with budgets of millions, is unlikely to be forthcoming under present government policy.

    Where do we go from here?
    So where do we go from here? Well a good place to start would be to join up the existing accountability mechanisms so that Ofsted’s educational expertise , the EFA’s financial oversight and Regional Commissioner’s growing local knowledge , could provide a 360 picture of, not only what is going on in MATs but equally, provide some sense of impending and serious failings.

    Any such system should also have some way of measuring exactly how and to what extent these large organizations are serving the communities in which they are situated. Only then could the public be reassured that we have anything remotely resembling a democratic system of Education in England.

    References:
    Baxter, J. (2018). Engaging with local communities: the challenge of board engagement with school communities in multi- academy trusts. Under review.
    Baxter, J. (2018). MAT Accountability : Challenges and Opportunities for Inspectors and school Leaders. . Keynote speech presented at the ‘Raising Standards through MAT inspection’ Conference ,19th June. London, Holborn .
    Chapman, C., Collins, A., Sammons, P., Armstrong, P., & Muijs, D. (2009). The impact of federations on student outcomes.
    Foss, N. J., Husted, K., & Michailova, S. (2010). Governing knowledge sharing in organizations: Levels of analysis, governance mechanisms, and research directions. Journal of Management Studies, 47(3), 455-482.
    NCTL. (2013). Governance in Multi Academy Trusts. London: National College for Teaching and Leadership.
    Parliament, U. (2017). Multi-Academy Trusts: Seventh Report of Sesssion 2016-17. In H. o. C. E. Committee (Ed.). London: House of Commons .
    Vangen, S., Hayes, J. P., & Cornforth, C. (2015). Governing cross-sector, inter-organizational collaborations. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1237-1260.

     

    Jacqueline Baxter is Senior Lecturer /Associate Professor in Public Policy and Management , based in The Department of Public Leadership and Social Enterprise at the Open University Business school. Her research interests lie in the area of public service governance, accountability and trust. This article is part of a current funded project. She is Editor in Chief for the Sage publication Management in Education, and tweets at @drjacquebaxter. The author gratefully acknowledges funding received by The British Academy Lever Hulme Trust grant number SG161312

    School Governing : policy, politics and practices

    School governance FC

     

    What impact have the unprecedented and rapid changes to the structure of education in England had on
    school governors and policy makers? And what effect has the intensifying media and regulatory focus had
    on the volunteers who take on the job?

    Jacqueline Baxter takes the 2014 ‘Trojan Horse’ scandal, in which it was alleged that governors at 25 Birmingham schools were involved in the ‘Islamisation’ of secular state schools, as a focus point to examine the pressures and challenges in the current system. Informed by her twenty years’ experience as a school governor, she considers both media analysis and policy as well as the implications for the future of a
    democratic system of education in England.

    “Brings new insight into how and why governors are
    positioned within society and how shifting attitudes to the
    purpose of school have shaped the future of governance.”

    Ian
    Usher, ModernGovernor.com

    “Expertly explores the key issues surrounding modern school governance. A stimulating and informative
    read for anyone interested in school governance and leadership.”

    Ellie Cotgrave, National Governors’
    Association
    March 2016

    “A succinct, and fascinating, document on the many
    challenges we have faced as ‘Hidden Givers’ over the last
    few years.”

    Jane Owens, National Leader of Governance,
    Wirral

    For 35% discount on all Policy Press
    books subscribe to our newsletter:
    http://www.policypress.co.uk/subscribe.asp

    http://www.policypress.co.uk
    Blog: http://policypress.wordpress.com Policy Press
    @policypress Sign up for our e-newsletter at http://www.policypress.co.uk