Maximizing Which Results

As mentioned in the 8/2/16 post, “Rely on People or Rely on Systems,” the A+ priority of leadership is designing, building, and revising a system that prioritizes effort for the purpose of maximizing results. But I didn’t expound on which results.  In education we can pick any number of result categories to focus on.  Three common categories are spending, adult comfort and student success.  What I would like you to consider is that two of these are a zero sum game (if one wins, the others lose).  Only one path yields the elusive win/win, and only in the long term.

First, let’s look at the focus on spending.  It is possible to create systems that minimize spending.  Hooray, I win the budget cutting game!  However, the ultimate win in this game is to stretch staff and facilities to the point where the school provides low quality day care in decrepit warehouse like environments.  This is a miserable loss in terms of adult comfort and student success.

Now let’s look at adult comfort (which too many education leaders mistakenly call morale.  They ARE NOT the same thing).  It is possible to create systems that maximize adult comfort. Hooray, I win the my staff is happy game! However, the ultimate win in this game is to overpay staff to show up and teach whatever they want, whenever they want, anyway they want.  Scores and performance don't matter, because any lack of success is the fault of students, their families, the community, in fact everyone other than the person actually teaching in the classroom.  From a budget standpoint, the taxpayer foots a bill with next to nothing to show for it. This is a miserable loss in terms of budget and student success.

So let’s look at student success.  It is possible to create systems that maximize student opportunity.  Hooray, I win the students success game!  However, the ultimate win in this game means that I have to pay staff fairly and invest in training, tools and facilities.  In the short run, this means that I’m losing the budget game.  But in the long run, schools that improve student outcomes enhance the taxable value of local real estate and create a more skilled workforce that generate higher levels of tax revenue and attract a wider array of businesses.  This is a long-term win.

Also, to win the student success game, in the short-run, adult comfort in negatively impacted.  Staff have to train, plan, adjust, collaborate, reflect, and break a sweat, all day, every day.  In short, they have to work, which is darn near an antonym to comfort. However, when educators see the positive effect of their work on student performance, they become highly satisfied and increasingly motivated. I’ll take that over comfort 10 times out of 10.

All of this to illustrate the following point. If as a leader in education, you are focused on anything other than student success, ultimately you are playing a loser’s game. 

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

• Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies available on Amazon.com!  http://tinyurl.com/Fundamental5 
• Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Timer (Fundamental 5 Delivery Tool); PowerWalks CLC (Networked Formative Observation Tool) 
• Upcoming Presentations: LYS / TASSP Advanced Leadership Academy (Keynote); The 2016 Texas Charter School Conference (Multiple Presentations); The 4^th Annual Fundamental 5 National Summit (Keynote) 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation  and like Lead Your School on Facebook

Rely on People or Rely on Systems

There is no question that talented people are important to the success of an organization.  But beware of the trap of attributing all success to talent and all failure to the lack of talent. Talent can bring great individual success but it doesn’t bring long-term great organizational success.

It is the system that leverages and magnifies talent, that brings great organizational success.  As leaders, we can’t ignore the recruiting and cultivating of talent, but I will argue this is an A- priority.  Our A+ priority is designing, building, and revising a system that prioritizes effort for the purpose of maximizing results.

What is interesting is that the leader who espouses the value of talent, spends more of his time trying to buy and incentivize better staff.  Yet even with this focus, he still ends up looking at the back bumper of the leader who focuses on system design, execution and training.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

• Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies available on Amazon.com!  http://tinyurl.com/Fundamental5 
• Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Timer (Fundamental 5 Delivery Tool); PowerWalks CLC (Networked Formative Observation Tool) 
• Upcoming Presentations: LYS / TASSP Advanced Leadership Academy (Keynote); The 2016 Texas Charter School Conference (Multiple Presentations); The 4^th Annual Fundamental 5 National Summit (Keynote) 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation  and like Lead Your School on Facebook

The Secret of System Success

The secret to system success is simple.

1. Strip away all the window dressing.

2. Strip away all the superfluous complexity.

3. Strip away all the extra steps.

4. Build in redundancy.

Then implement the system, with fidelity, at 100% effort.  Then in short time windows, assess, refine, adjust and repeat at 100% effort.  As each cycle is executed efficiency and expertise incrementally improve. 

For example, the Fundamental 5 are the Fundamental 5 because whatever your step 6 is... It isn’t fundamental. And omitting even one of the Fundamental 5 leaves significant performance on the table.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

• Call Jo at (832) 477-LEAD to order your campus set of “The Fundamental 5: The Formula for Quality Instruction.” Individual copies available on Amazon.com!  http://tinyurl.com/Fundamental5 
• Now at the Apple App Store: Fun 5 Timer (Fundamental 5 Delivery Tool); PowerWalks CLC (Networked Formative Observation Tool) 
• Upcoming Presentations: Texas Association of Secondary School Principals Conference (Multiple Presentations); Texas Elementary Principals and Supervisors Association Conference (Multiple Presentations); LYS / TASSP Advanced Leadership Academy (Keynote) 
• Follow Sean Cain and LYS on www.Twitter.com/LYSNation  and like Lead Your School on Facebook

A Reader Asks... PowerWalks

A regular LYS reader asks,

“I'm very interested in PowerWalks. Our district utilizes the 3 minute walk through, which takes longer than 3 minutes, that's for sure. Not sure that I'm 100% committed to this way of doing walk throughs. I'm looking for something that will benefit my teachers and students better."

SC Response
Some quick background information. There are six basic categories of classroom observations. However, as you will see, each specific protocol will overlap into multiple categories. Briefly the categories are as follows:

Extended time observations
Longer than 15 minutes. These observations are usually scheduled and provide the teacher the opprotunity to demonstrate all that they know (the dog and pony show). But the dog and pony show is important. It allows to observer to gauge the current ceiling of teacher performance.

Short time observations
Less than 6 minutes. These observations are usually unannounced and give the observer an opportunity to gauge a teacher’s typical practice.

Subjective observations
Requires the observer to make judgment calls on quality and/or teacher intent.

Objective observations
Requires the observer to monitor only specific and observable practices and activities.

Formative observations
Collected data and observations are for the purpose of coaching teachers and improving performance

Summative observations
Collected data and observations are for the purpose of evaluating or ranking teachers.

All of these observations are useful, but as you can see the categories serve different purposes. Where administrators get in trouble is when they use the wrong tool for the task. Or they try to make the “Swiss Army knife" observation protocol. And like the Swiss Army knife, though it may look neat, it darn sure isn’t useful.

So now we get to practice. You need two tools. One is an extended time observation tool, primarily used in the summative evaluation process. The other is a short time observation tool, used only for formative assessment. Anyone who tries to convince you that one tool can do both is either trying to sell you something, is lazy, ignorant, and/or dangerous (I’m begging, someone try to debate me on this). Also, stay away from subjective tools. What you think is much less valid than what you actually see. You will never build sustainable system-wide capacity through subjective means. You may be able to develop individual talent, but if you are relying on individual talent to sustain your organization then you are already dying a slow death.

So where does PowerWalks come into play. It is a short time, objective, formative classroom observation tool. Nothing unusual there. But it has the most powerful disaggregation tool available attached to it. It constantly evolves and it is inexpensive. Nothing comes closer to giving you and your staff “game film” of instructional craft. Anything more would be a sales pitch, which I won’t bore you with. But if anyone in the LYS Nation is interested in trying the tool, you can use it risk free for a semester. And if you are attending the TASSP Summer Conference, every attendee gets PowerWalks for their campus for a semester for free. Plus, TASSP will train you how to use it, at the conference.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

A Reader Writes... (Teacher Stress - Part 15)

In response to the post, “Teacher Stress – Part 9,” the writer writes:

“So the campus administrators will know, "Central Office" was my focus. I do agree that everyone has their own perception. This is not about principals. It's about Central Office not being in touch with realistic goals and respecting the teaching profession. How can we all get on the same boat?”

SC Response
It seems as if you are concerned with the disconnect between Central Office and campuses. This is a near universal phenomenon. There are some answers to this, but they are so radical that only a few leaders have attempted it. Strangely, I have worked for, or with, three pioneers in this area, Robert Brezina, Richard Griffin and Shirley Neeley.

To get the LYS Nation up to speed, I will quickly summarize the work of Dr. Bob Thompson, out of Lamar University. Dr. Thompson correctly points out that the disconnect between Central Office and the campus is systemic and is entirely the fault (responsibility) of the Superintendent. What happens is that there are two centers of gravity in a district, Superintendent and Principal. The closer you are to one of those centers, the more you are influenced by that particular center. Unfortunately, when you get to Central Office you realize that your long term success is based on keeping the Superintendent happy, so the needs of campuses (Principals) quickly take second tier status.

So how do you fix this? The Superintendent has to turn the world upside down. That means that the system has to be purposefully manipulated to make the Principal at least as important as the Superintendent. Here are three ways to do this:

1. The Thompson Method (used by Neeley). In the traditional district, the Superintendent evaluates the Central Office staff. Keep the Superintendent happy and you keep your job. Make the Principals unhappy and nobody cares. Using Thompson’s method, the Superintendent and the Principals evaluate Central Office staff. 40% of the evaluation is based on the Superintendent’s input, 60% from the Principals. Make the Principals unhappy and the Superintendent can’t save you. The center of gravity (balance of power) is shifted and the needs of the campus take precedent.

2. The Griffin Method. The high school principals and the assistant superintendents are equals and are on the same salary scale. This keeps leadership capacity at the campus level and ensures that Central Office can not arbitrarily tell a principal “No.” The center of gravity is shifted (balance of power) and the needs of the campus are better addressed.

3. The Brezina Method. Make the unit of measurement in the salary system based on the value of the principal (example: The Director of Technology = 0.8 Principal). Then, base the evaluation of Central Office staff on the results of the lowest performing campus. The center of gravity is shifted (balance of power) and the needs of the campus are better addressed.

Without Superintendent mandate, the disconnect is never really addressed. What is funny (funny sad, not funny Ha Ha) is that when the Superintendent who corrects the disconnect leaves, you can get whiplash from how fast the system snaps back to the old way of doing things. The needs of Ego will trump the needs of students darn near every time.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

A Reader Writes... (Advice 2/7/10 - Part 2)

In response to the posts relating to, “A Reader Shares… (Sunday Advice 2/7/10),” a reader writes:

"Great explanation, I stand corrected. I thought that the philosophy the LYS team was using was aimed at incompetency and not systems. I fully understand and agree.

Check Fire! Check Fire!"

SC Response
Just to confuse the situation even more, we actually target both. We work to build systems that maximize student opportunity (effective) and maximize the success of the adults in the system (efficient). Obviously, in that pursuit, the incompetent often end up in the crosshairs. For us, that is neither good nor bad, it just is. This is why we operate under the assumption that the only unforgivable sin is not being coachable.

Incompetence is generally the result of either misguided ignorance or a calculated endeavor to further self-interest. Neither of which has to be terminal. Over the course of my life and career I have suffered from both, been cured and then relapsed. We are all human and suffer the passions and frailties of our existence. But a strong system, coaching, reflection and leadership can make us better than who we are. As you might guess, in the nature vs. nurture argument, I take the optimistic “nurture” side.

Mission, purpose, vision and leadership can either augment our base character or erode it. Hence, the principal is in the best position to focus the collective will (service to students) on the collective purpose (student performance). Or the principal can abdicate that responsibility and let factions and adult interests trample over those that have no voice, yet have the most to gain and lose, our students.

Which brings us to the need to:

1. Understand the complexities of social systems.
2. Work to build checks to overcome the frailties of those systems.
3. Work to build fulcrums to leverage the strengths of those systems.
4. Coach the people in those systems.
5. Identify, remediate or remove those that are detrimental to the system.

As you can see, Brown’s Rule is useful construct to further this pursuit.

By the way, as you will see in the next couple of days, you have kicked over a hornets’ nest. It’s good to know that I can again count on the Marines to have my back.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

Have a System and Start Running

I was recently talking with a first year principal, what was working, what wasn’t, etc. The conversation eventually led to two critical practices that are almost never shared with rookies, and as such, effectively lengthens their learning curve. Here are the practices:

First, have a system. By system, I mean a focus, structure, and a body of general practices and procedures that you want implemented effectively and consistently. It does not have to be overly elaborate and it does not have to be in a formal document. But you have to know what you want to do and how you expect it to get done. And most importantly, you have to be able to communicate your intent and be able to train people, based on your system.

Without a system, three things occur. 1- You become the source of all knowledge (and no one is that smart). 2 – All you can do is put out fires all day long. 3 – The agendas of the informal leaders on the campus will overwhelm your agenda.

Use the coaching community as an example. Have you ever heard a new head coach in any sport say, “I don’t have a clue what I’m going to do. I’m just going to make up a new plan everyday, based on what the world throws at us.”

No, they say, “We’re going to implement my system, and once the team understands it, we will complete at the highest level.”

Second, start implementing immediately. A cancer that attacks education leadership is this concept that new leaders should take at least a semester (and generally two) just to observe and get an understanding about what is really going on, before doing anything substantive. Few ideas are more misguided. You are there to improve performance and get the most out of the organization. You do that by action, not by letting the auto-pilot assume command. Do you need to assess? Of course, but you do that on the fly.

Again, when’s the last time you heard a new coach say, “I’m just going to let everybody keep doing what they were doing for a season. Then I’ll really start working to improve.”

So to sum up, have a system, start immediately and assess on the fly.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…