Totally agree and this aligns with my experience in leading change. Shifting assumptions and avoiding universalising the staff as some monolithic group led to a better understanding of why people struggled with change. Much of it was low-confidence in the face of 'superstar' teachers, which led us to start elevating and showcasing the classroom practices that were less 'dazzling', but highly effective and practical. Once that happened, people realised that the shift was manageable and within their control. Lesson learned: show an interest in the motivations of your colleagues. And as my father would say: get your rocket ship back to earth.
Thank you very much for writing this David. We haven’t met, but this is a timely piece for me personally - I have of late felt like the deputy principal at my current school was trying to eject my dissenting voice from her rocket ship.
Absolutely agree with this. Your surplus model reminds me of something Edgar Schein wrote about when individuals don’t align in the culture, he said this was not the fault of individuals but issues caused by more senior leaders designs - this makes me think of your section on finding our what is stopping staff doing the right thing. I experienced this way of leading early in my career and try to lead like this myself. Great blog David.
Very strongly agree - while also understanding and respecting those who succeed in a ‘rocket ship’ model. And in fact, that is the point. People’s motivations are never singular. You can be both misaligned and misunderstood - you can be failing and full of potential at the same time. The benefit of the surplus model you describe is that in choosing to see the best, you invite people to believe in the best about themselves.
Very much an aside, but I'd strongly suggest anyone using rocket ships as a metaphor for good culture should read Adam Higginbotham's book about the Challenger disaster (as should anyone interested in organisational culture more generally, of course)
Great post! I love how you phrased the deficit model as "problem finding." Years ago I had an administrator like that--they pointed out perceived problems, demanded solutions, but could offer no constructive feedback. (This speaks to their limited time teaching, I'm afraid.) I even left the profession briefly after that terrible, rotten, no-good year.
Thanks Adam. To quote Fitzgerald, They were careless people – they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”
This article clarifies the experiences of teachers up and down the country who feel the pinch and squeeze of a leadership culture that thrives on reducing complex acts to a reductive binary of good or bad, compliance or rebellion. And for the many reasons outlined here, it’s not a particularly humane or productive culture, and yet it’s becoming ubiquitous. I wonder if this Thatcherite organisational model, a quick short term gains model, finds itself back in vogue because it’s easier, cheaper and more convenient to discard experienced, thoughtful, evaluative staff and replace with newly qualified ones that are more likely to follow dictates, lacking perhaps the experience and confidence to question and evaluate leadership choices. If so, this deficit model will only consume itself as it suffocates the potential greatness of the next generation of teachers under the smothering weight of restrictive conformity. If so, the rocket will never leave the atmosphere, let alone propel itself beyond the stars.
Thanks for this — it’s clearly written with conviction and heartfelt concern, and I think we’re in agreement on more than we’re not.
That said, I’d push back pretty firmly on the Thatcherite framing. It’s tempting to see the centralisation of power, the erosion of nuance, and the preference for command-and-control as ideological relics of the 1980s. But I’m not sure it holds. Most school leaders I’ve worked with don’t think of themselves as enforcers of compliance or efficiency-maximisers. They’re trying, often under immense pressure, to do what they believe is right for students. That belief may sometimes manifest in systems that feel heavy-handed or in cultures that privilege obedience over insight, but rarely, if ever, is the intention cynical.
In fact, I’d argue that part of the problem isn’t so much authoritarianism as it is inertia. For all the critique, there remains too much complacency. Too much settling for what seems to work, even if it only works on paper. Too little genuine curiosity about whether what we’re doing actually leads to children learning more, remembering more, or thinking better.
So yes, we should challenge reductive binaries and resist cultures that stifle reflective practice. But we should also be wary of easy diagnoses. The real danger isn’t a Thatcherite resurgence, it’s the slow drift into mediocrity disguised as best practice.
Thank you for the response, David. My experience of school leadership will be fundamentally limited compared to yours so I absolutely take on board your expansive points about the limitations of the Thatcherite model. There is one point you make that I’m keen to explore further: I agree that authoritarianism isn’t so much the problem as inertia with most school leaders: however, where I have experienced authoritarianism in leadership, I’d argue that it disguises inertia, and that the two co-exist as resultant components of each other. Authoritarianism is often the last refuge of a limited imagination, a will unable to adapt to a more complex reading of the world. This is not to say that its manifest throughout the educational landscape, but I’ve seen more examples of it recently.
While the weather system metaphor attempts to highlight complexity and external forces, it ultimately undermines the intentionality crucial for fostering a truly effective school culture.Instead of a weather system, it could be worth considering a carefully cultivated ecosystem? A weather system feels out of control, hard to navigate, helpless? An ecosystem is complex and evolving, but it's also interconnected and interdependent. Each element plays a vital role, and the health of the whole depends on the health of its parts. Unlike a weather system, an ecosystem can be intentionally designed and nurtured. You can introduce new species, enrich the soil, and create conditions for specific flora and fauna to thrive.
Thanks Ben - I appreciate you taking the time to engage with a humble writer who’s not been properly sound checked or audited :)
It’s probably not worth spending *too* much time pulling metaphors apart. I agree though that SCHOOL = ECOSYSTEM is much better than SCHOOL = ROCKET SHIP. Ecosystem suggests far more care and attention for all the flora and fauna that exist within it.
Thought provoking. G2G is still my favourite leadership book - even if it didn’t age well. I think the alignment isn’t necessarily about compliance but more the same shared values while respecting that people might have different beliefs. Having people with the same values on your bus (or rocket ship) is vitally important.
Totally agree David and try to live out the surplus model as a Senior Leader
...after all Rocket ships by definition take us to places with no atmosphere!
Ha! That’s good, I’m sure I’ll steal it.
Totally agree and this aligns with my experience in leading change. Shifting assumptions and avoiding universalising the staff as some monolithic group led to a better understanding of why people struggled with change. Much of it was low-confidence in the face of 'superstar' teachers, which led us to start elevating and showcasing the classroom practices that were less 'dazzling', but highly effective and practical. Once that happened, people realised that the shift was manageable and within their control. Lesson learned: show an interest in the motivations of your colleagues. And as my father would say: get your rocket ship back to earth.
Thank you very much for writing this David. We haven’t met, but this is a timely piece for me personally - I have of late felt like the deputy principal at my current school was trying to eject my dissenting voice from her rocket ship.
Thank you again.
Absolutely agree with this. Your surplus model reminds me of something Edgar Schein wrote about when individuals don’t align in the culture, he said this was not the fault of individuals but issues caused by more senior leaders designs - this makes me think of your section on finding our what is stopping staff doing the right thing. I experienced this way of leading early in my career and try to lead like this myself. Great blog David.
Very strongly agree - while also understanding and respecting those who succeed in a ‘rocket ship’ model. And in fact, that is the point. People’s motivations are never singular. You can be both misaligned and misunderstood - you can be failing and full of potential at the same time. The benefit of the surplus model you describe is that in choosing to see the best, you invite people to believe in the best about themselves.
Thanks. That’s my belief
Very much an aside, but I'd strongly suggest anyone using rocket ships as a metaphor for good culture should read Adam Higginbotham's book about the Challenger disaster (as should anyone interested in organisational culture more generally, of course)
Great post! I love how you phrased the deficit model as "problem finding." Years ago I had an administrator like that--they pointed out perceived problems, demanded solutions, but could offer no constructive feedback. (This speaks to their limited time teaching, I'm afraid.) I even left the profession briefly after that terrible, rotten, no-good year.
Thanks Adam. To quote Fitzgerald, They were careless people – they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”
I really like this. Especially as someone who has often been perceived as a 'difficult' member of staff!
You Bernard? Surely not 😂
But, in all seriousness, ‘awkward’ members of staff also tend to be those who really care.
Haha it's hard to imagine, I know!
This is good.
This article clarifies the experiences of teachers up and down the country who feel the pinch and squeeze of a leadership culture that thrives on reducing complex acts to a reductive binary of good or bad, compliance or rebellion. And for the many reasons outlined here, it’s not a particularly humane or productive culture, and yet it’s becoming ubiquitous. I wonder if this Thatcherite organisational model, a quick short term gains model, finds itself back in vogue because it’s easier, cheaper and more convenient to discard experienced, thoughtful, evaluative staff and replace with newly qualified ones that are more likely to follow dictates, lacking perhaps the experience and confidence to question and evaluate leadership choices. If so, this deficit model will only consume itself as it suffocates the potential greatness of the next generation of teachers under the smothering weight of restrictive conformity. If so, the rocket will never leave the atmosphere, let alone propel itself beyond the stars.
Thanks for this — it’s clearly written with conviction and heartfelt concern, and I think we’re in agreement on more than we’re not.
That said, I’d push back pretty firmly on the Thatcherite framing. It’s tempting to see the centralisation of power, the erosion of nuance, and the preference for command-and-control as ideological relics of the 1980s. But I’m not sure it holds. Most school leaders I’ve worked with don’t think of themselves as enforcers of compliance or efficiency-maximisers. They’re trying, often under immense pressure, to do what they believe is right for students. That belief may sometimes manifest in systems that feel heavy-handed or in cultures that privilege obedience over insight, but rarely, if ever, is the intention cynical.
In fact, I’d argue that part of the problem isn’t so much authoritarianism as it is inertia. For all the critique, there remains too much complacency. Too much settling for what seems to work, even if it only works on paper. Too little genuine curiosity about whether what we’re doing actually leads to children learning more, remembering more, or thinking better.
So yes, we should challenge reductive binaries and resist cultures that stifle reflective practice. But we should also be wary of easy diagnoses. The real danger isn’t a Thatcherite resurgence, it’s the slow drift into mediocrity disguised as best practice.
Thank you for the response, David. My experience of school leadership will be fundamentally limited compared to yours so I absolutely take on board your expansive points about the limitations of the Thatcherite model. There is one point you make that I’m keen to explore further: I agree that authoritarianism isn’t so much the problem as inertia with most school leaders: however, where I have experienced authoritarianism in leadership, I’d argue that it disguises inertia, and that the two co-exist as resultant components of each other. Authoritarianism is often the last refuge of a limited imagination, a will unable to adapt to a more complex reading of the world. This is not to say that its manifest throughout the educational landscape, but I’ve seen more examples of it recently.
While the weather system metaphor attempts to highlight complexity and external forces, it ultimately undermines the intentionality crucial for fostering a truly effective school culture.Instead of a weather system, it could be worth considering a carefully cultivated ecosystem? A weather system feels out of control, hard to navigate, helpless? An ecosystem is complex and evolving, but it's also interconnected and interdependent. Each element plays a vital role, and the health of the whole depends on the health of its parts. Unlike a weather system, an ecosystem can be intentionally designed and nurtured. You can introduce new species, enrich the soil, and create conditions for specific flora and fauna to thrive.
Thanks Ben - I appreciate you taking the time to engage with a humble writer who’s not been properly sound checked or audited :)
It’s probably not worth spending *too* much time pulling metaphors apart. I agree though that SCHOOL = ECOSYSTEM is much better than SCHOOL = ROCKET SHIP. Ecosystem suggests far more care and attention for all the flora and fauna that exist within it.
Lol - nice one
But I enjoyed both articles so thanks
Thought provoking. G2G is still my favourite leadership book - even if it didn’t age well. I think the alignment isn’t necessarily about compliance but more the same shared values while respecting that people might have different beliefs. Having people with the same values on your bus (or rocket ship) is vitally important.
I’m not so sure. Avoiding group think by embracing divergent opinions is also vital.
I've experienced guiding statements and and values on walls as false slogans.
'Diversity' and 'Innovation' used as a tool for double speak by leadership who do not exhibit either.
Teachers in meetings signaling their performative alignment—understanding that in doing so, they can stand inside the circle of favouritism.
At a school that had so much potential to be something special.