We had another first/second year headship session today.
These sessions are great, not only for the fact that you get to network with other new/newish headteachers, but that you get to debate about key pieces of research and be able to discuss issues with very experienced educators. I’m really surprised that there aren’t more headteachers involved!
Today we discussed a range of things. But, one of the key issues was that of change. Now, I’ve discussed change often here on my blog. We looked at three different change management tools/theories. It is interesting to read about these processes to deal with change, however when you dig down to it, do you really follow a method step-by-step? Or do you just deal with change as and when it comes? Isn’t change dealt with according to the context?
I understand the ideas behind these ‘change management tools,’ but really can we stick to something point by point, especially dealing with something so unpredictable as ‘change’? Understandably, on reflection we will be able to see that we have incorporated many of the steps from one model rather than another. However, it is clear that all successful ‘changes’ have included key traits; such as transparency, clear vision, incorporating everyone’s ideas, etc, etc.
A concerning statistic about change that was claimed in one of these papers was that 70% of all change was unsuccessful. What constitutes success?
There are different types of change – superficial change and embedded change. Is superficial change ever necessary or is it always better to look into the future and only work towards embedded changed?
We always talk about ‘quick wins’ as a new headteacher. Aren’t these ‘quick wins’ mostly superficial? Or can we have ‘quick wins’ that can also be embedded?
Change…..it is always there…….it is always inevitable.
Do you follow a model for change?
Most of you will know about the great book that discusses change and hopes to make it more manageable….Who Moved My Cheese?