Leadership by Permission
When you walk into Principal Dana Wilson’s office, you see a sign on her desk that reads, “It is nice to be important, but it is important to be nice.” From the first day of her principalship, Principal Wilson has understood that she is on a journey. She became a leader by position but to truly lead, she had to figure out how to lead people. She had to earn the trust and respect of others first to move to the next level of leadership, leading by permission.
When a leader learns to function on the permission level, those he or she leads do more than merely comply with orders; they actually start to follow their leader, and they do so because they really want to. What they do is grant permission to the leader to lead with the actions they take in following this person. This is because the leader begins to influence people with their relationship, not just with his or her position (Maxwell, 2011). Maxwell (2011) reminds us that permission leaders enjoy interacting with people and want to help them succeed. They focus on serving others and bringing out the best in people. These leaders model their positive belief in others, empowering them and sharing leadership. The permission leader’s ability to intentionally focus on the positive in every action and conversation allows others to feel trusted and supported. Their ability to let go of control and allow others to authentically share in the decisions also empowers others and instills trust. Leaders who lead by permission have the following characteristics. They:
• Model a genuine interest and ability in effective communication with others
• Lead by example; demonstrate, coach, practice, and learn with their staff by doing the work, side by side with others who are also taking action—not waiting for others to do what needs to be done
• Use their skills—rather than their position—to get things done; take advantage of teachable moments, creating opportunities for others to lead, and continue to be lifelong learners, understanding that to lead means a continuous journey of learning how to work with people
• Refuse to pull rank to get things done, understanding that leading from permission is more effective than using positional power
• Understand that true leadership is about laying out the road map and charting the course—not just driving the bus or steering the ship
Reflection
What leadership characteristics do you exhibit on a daily basis? What sign would you have on your desk to describe the type of leader you are? How would you demonstrate alignment of your actions to what your sign says? In your current practice, what qualities of permission-based leadership do you model?
Let’s consider some ways leaders can lead by permission rather than by position.
The Why Before the What
In Start With Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action, author, motivational speaker, and marketing consultant Simon Sinek (2009) expresses, “People don’t buy WHAT you do, they buy WHY you do it” (p. 41). In his book, Sinek (2009) connects this idea to corporations, but it has great value for schools and school leaders. Sinek’s (2009) message includes the concept of the golden circle, which looks like a target with the word why in the inner circle, the word how in the middle ring, and the word what in the outer ring.
The golden circle concept is based on Sinek’s (2009) finding that most companies or organizations work from the outside in. They begin with the what and how before focusing on the why, sometimes not even getting to the why. Sinek (2009) argues that when you start with the why, people are more likely to understand the work and commit to it. It’s a simple concept, but extremely powerful.
We have been aware of Sinek’s (2009) work, yet we still sometimes start with the what. Why? Because it’s hard to start with the why! It takes a lot more effort to think about the why behind the what and how. In fact, sometimes the why is unclear. For this reason alone, starting with the why is essential. In our work in schools, we see a lot of whats and hows without clearly articulated whys. However, starting with the why is a highly necessary shift in school leadership. DuFour et al. (2016) note that working together to build shared knowledge is the best way to achieve shared goals. In a PLC, leaders must help educators understand the need for transformation before working together to develop a common vocabulary and an understanding of key PLC concepts and processes. Leaders must avoid the temptation to be very directive and make assumptions about staff knowledge. But this can be difficult!
The work of school leaders is exhausting. We know this from experience! Most days it can feel like you are on a hamster wheel. Decision after decision and crisis after crisis make it hard to have intentional and focused conversations about the why. Explaining is often put aside in favor of assuming. School leaders assume others will understand why they want something done. They assume everyone has the same vision and gets the big picture and the why—why collaborate, why data should inform practices, why a certain rule is in place, and so on. Consistency of practice throughout the school is of the utmost importance, and without communicating the why, leaders risk assumption over explanation. And, leaders have to communicate the why more often than they think. Jeff Weiner, CEO of LinkedIn, paraphrases American political commentator and former presidential advisor David Gergen, when he says, “If you want to get your point across, especially to a broader audience, you need to repeat yourself so often, you get sick of hearing yourself say it. And only then will people begin to internalize what you’re saying” (as quoted in Lighthouse, 2018). Consider the following scenarios.
What First
Peter Smith is principal of a large middle school in the center of a city facing violence and gang wars. Principal Smith has struggled with discipline. At an administration meeting, Principal Smith talks with other principals who share a rule they have implemented that they claim has made a big difference: students wearing hoodies must have the hood down at all times in school. Principal Smith thinks this is a good rule and goes back to his school the next day and makes an announcement informing all teachers and students of the new rule, effective immediately. There are no conversations with staff or students about the why. By noon, the students begin to revolt. A group of students in the cafeteria decides they will all wear their hoods up in protest, and this is what Principal Smith deals with the rest of the day.
Why First
Two streets away at the high school, Principal Ramona Davis, who attended the same administration meeting, also decides to enforce this rule. She first calls a brief morning meeting and explains why she has called the staff together. She reviews the agreements the staff made earlier in the year about student respect, including student dress expectations, setting the stage with the why. She then explains the what, telling the team she would like to consider how students wearing their hoods up in school either aligns or does not align with the expectations the staff set earlier in the year. The staff consider the hoodie problem (the what) through the lens of their agreements around respect and student dress (the why). Most teachers express that they feel uncomfortable when students have their hoods up because they can’t really see their faces or determine who they are from a distance. The staff also feel wearing hoodies up is disrespecting the no hats rule the school has in place. They all agree it is time to address the issue, and the staff agree to enforce the new rule. Principal Davis suggests she needs to talk to the students first.
Principal Davis decides to meet with the students in each grade for a few minutes that morning, calling the ninth graders together first. She quietly explains the teachers’ concerns when they can’t fully see the students and that, as a school, it goes against their uniform commitments, including no hats, which all students abide by. She listens to the students’ concerns and asks for their cooperation. Some of the students speak up and say they are glad because they don’t feel as safe when people are hiding under their hoodies. She is also clear with the students on the consequences, which the staff decided in their earlier meeting. Principal Davis repeats this conversation with all the grades that morning, and t
he hoodie rule goes into effect without incident the following day.
Reflection
What is the difference in these practices? In what ways can you relate to either or both of these examples? Have you struggled with a decision that you know is the correct decision but did not communicate it effectively? What support do you need to increase your leadership capacity in this area?
Obviously, Principal Davis understands the importance of building collective commitments and common understanding of the why. She also knows some students will object, but by taking the time to meet with staff and students personally and explain the why, she supports her ability to lead by permission, shares responsibility for decision making, and has a much better chance of implementing the new rule successfully. In his school, Principal Smith led from positional power, assuming that because he announced the changes, students and staff would understand why and follow his lead. He did not use his communication, trust-building, or relationship skills to create understanding and ownership, and he did not provide any opportunities for staff opinions to be heard and valued. In this situation, Principal Smith demonstrated several of the ineffective leadership practices of positional leadership, especially forgetting that lead is a verb, requiring action.
Community-Building Practices
A review of international school leadership practices in seven countries—the United States, Canada, England, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Singapore, and Australia—finds that high-performing principals did not necessarily work longer hours than other principals; they simply spent more time with the people in their schools (Barber, Whelan, & Clark, 2010). High-performing leaders “walked the halls more, spent more time coaching teachers, interacted more often with parents and external administrators, and spent more time with students” (Barber et al., 2010, p. 7). Leaders can be very effective in building community and relationships with staff by supporting their teams’ collaborative work and by implementing community-building practices with parents and the community.
With Staff
School leaders must be careful to not assume that once teams are formed and operating, they do not need support. We believe it is critical for school leaders to guide and support teams in discussing and using the data they gather during their cycles of collective inquiry to make evidence-based decisions. Whenever possible, attend meetings and gently guide teams as they work through a given protocol. Your guidance and support help create a truly collaborative culture. We have worked with masterful leaders who pay attention to details such as the language teams use during discussions, and then offer more strengths-based alternative language (versus deficit-based language). Simply keeping the focus on strengths can go a long way in helping teams help students succeed. Table 8.1 includes five deficit- versus strengths-based thinking dispositions school leaders can help foster in their collaborative teams.
In chapter 3 (page 57), we discussed the very important role school leaders have in creating a shared leadership model with staff members. This is a critical aspect of a PLC. As DuFour et al. (2016) explain:
Members of the school have the benefit of clear parameters that provide direction and coherence to the improvement process; however, they are also given the freedom and tools to make their own contribution to that process. This autonomy allows the school community to benefit from the insights and expertise of those who are called upon to do the actual work. (p. 113)
Creating simultaneously loose and tight expectations, but not really allowing anything to be loose, makes staff members question whether leaders trust them. For many leaders, learning to give up control and balancing what tasks to share with others—implementing side-by-side leadership versus top-down leadership—are a challenging tasks. Here are some suggestions of ways that you can be simultaneously loose and tight to help develop trusting relationships with staff members.
TABLE 8.1: A Comparison Between Deficit- and Strengths-Based Thinking
Deficit-Based Thinking
Strengths-Based Thinking
Strengths-Based Thinkers…
Focuses on what’s broken
Focuses on what’s working
Appreciate the perfect over the imperfect, and strengths over weaknesses and past disappointments
Focuses on weaknesses
Emphasizes possibilities
Increase their capacity to act, which encourages greater possibilities for success
Focuses on problem solving
Focuses on co-constructing solutions
Are more likely to work together to produce better outcomes for students
Highlights past failures
Highlights past successes
Interpret the world through a lens of appreciation that reveals the greatness of everything around us
Predicts and controls
Discovers and surprises
Are adventurers who appreciate the inconveniences and annoyances of life as much as the dramatic appeal of systemwide change
Source: Adapted from California Teachers Association Institute for Teaching, n.d.
• While making it clear that you are tight on your expectation that teachers collaboratively plan together, be sure to recognize and celebrate the unique teaching styles of individual teachers. Frequently showcase a teacher’s classroom abilities by inviting others to his or her classroom for observation, having the teacher lead professional development on a strategy, or simply celebrate and share what you have seen by telling others on staff. Be sure to acknowledge this hard work with the teacher first, prior to sharing with others. Your goal is to help your staff see that even though you have tight expectations, for example, about the structure of an effective lesson, you are loose about teachers’ personalizing with their own teaching styles.
• Avoid micromanaging. In other words, once you have made clear your expectations, answered questions and concerns, and provided the training and information necessary to build capacity, let teachers do the work. The tight is that they know what is expected, and the loose is that you demonstrate trust and respect in their ability to figure out how to get the work done.
• Set deadlines and create accountability tools to progress monitor your expectations (your tights) and then follow this plan. In other words, if you develop a timeline and then start checking every day on an individual’s or a team’s progress, you are not allowing flexibility in the how or demonstrating trust in their ability to independently accomplish the task. The loose has to be in the empowerment you create.
• Seek every opportunity to have staff give you suggestions and their ideas on how to reach school goals and outcomes. Again, the tights are what you want to accomplish and expect, and by being open (loose) with some of the ways that the school can get there, you will continue to build relationships.
With Parents and the Community
In our school-improvement work, parents often tell us that teachers assume they do not want to know about curriculum or instructional expectations. Parents often cite examples of times they wished they had known more about what was expected, what the learning should look like, and how to help their child. We worked with one high school parent who was very frustrated about his daughter’s mathematics progress. He didn’t seem to understand standards-based expectations and was quick to comment that he found the “new math” very challenging. We shared some information about the level of rigor and language of the state standards, as well as resources he could access with his daughter to support her learning. His parting comment to us was that he wished the school had shared some of this with him or his daughter before then. He felt helpless merely from a lack of information.
Another parent in an elementary school told us that he and his wife were surprised at the end of the year to learn that their daughter did not know most of her required vocabulary words. He expressed his disappointment in not being able to help with this work throughout the year. You see, the collaborative team had done a great job of setting increased vocabulary as part of their SMART goals, establis
hing the number of words and what they would be for the year. They built the goal into their year-long instructional plan and progress monitored regularly. However, they never communicated this goal or even the list of words with parents. At the end of the year, a summary of the words students mastered and did not master appeared on individual student progress reports. This was the first time the team had communicated with the parents. The team missed an opportunity to involve parents as partners with their goal.
Parents often struggle in understanding school discipline practices. Effective communication in this area, as in all others, involves building a stronger understanding of why. As in the previous example with Principal Smith, parents will be able to support and help their children when they have more information about why decisions are made, including why policies and procedures are in place. The students in Principal Smith’s school did not understand why hoodies were an issue, so parents would also likely have trouble seeing the rationale for banning them without an explanation. We create difficult situations for parents when the only communication that they receive is from the students’ point of view.
The final example we would like you to reflect on is what happens when leaders leave parents out of opportunities to celebrate with their students. Karen can remember a time when she experienced this personally. Her youngest daughter played many sports in high school, including goalie for the ice hockey team. At the end of one season, her daughter came home to tell her that the hockey team had been invited to the coach’s house the next night, and some of the parents might be going. Karen had a work commitment, so she didn’t attend the social event. Partway through the evening, she received a text from her daughter that the team coaches surprised them with awards. Karen’s daughter received two awards, and it was immediately clear that her daughter was disappointed she wasn’t there to see the event, as was Karen. The coach could have easily communicated with parents so they would have understood both the significance of the night and the awards. Celebrations about student success—academic or otherwise—should always include parents. They should be included not just when things aren’t going well, but also when things are going well.
Leading With Intention Page 15
