A Reader Writes... (Cain's Commentary)

In response to some of my advice / commentary, a reader writes:

“I question the, ‘it's OK to be frequently wrong, but never in doubt,’ advice if you want to remain in a position of power within an organization. If you make 100 mistakes, but you demonstrate confidence in your actions and keep plowing along making mistakes, are your going to be OK?

I think you should learn from your mistakes and be wrong less frequently. Even if you show confidence that you are correct, others in the organization will lose confidence in your ability and stop following you. If you continue to plow ahead never in doubt, it indicates that you are either, incompetent, or out of touch with the reality of local control.”

SC Response
Excellent questions and points. Now, let’s talk. First, the proverb: “Great Principals are frequently wrong, but never in doubt.” This is a fundamental leadership practice and a critical nuance that even Fullan writes about. It recognizes the following duality: In complex and dynamic environments, as a leader you are forced to make decisions with incomplete information. When you do this, you will often decide wrong. If you wait too long, you will miss opportunities, also wrong. If as a leader, I know that there is a chance that my decision is wrong, and I let my team get a whiff of that, it will effect their morale and performance. If they know that I am completely confident, then they can be completely confident.

Two quick sayings that support this (both from Todd Whittaker).

1. When the principal catches a cold, the staff catches pneumonia; and

2. When you are the leader and someone asks you how things are going, the answer is always either, “Great,” or “Just like we planned.” Any other answer is a detriment to you, your team and the organization.

Now, if I know that I am frequently wrong, that means I always have to be scanning the environment, confirming data and listening to my team. That way, I can frequently adjust to maximize the effectiveness of the actions of the team. I view “frequently wrong,” as “constantly aware, aggressive and flexible.”

So you ask, “If I make 100 mistakes, yet remain confident, is that OK?”

To which I answer, it depends on who catches the mistake and when it is caught. If you and your team catch most of the mistakes early, you will fix them before anyone on the outside even knows that there might be an issue. It is amazing what you are able to figure out once you know for certain what does not work. We are in agreement, we should learn from our mistakes, but if I make 100 action oriented mistakes and you make just one, it won’t be long before I’m 100 times smarter than you are. This is one reason why the biggest leaps in the quality of our craft are now coming from schools that serve low SES students. Just to survive, the staff from those schools are forced to try and learn from their mistakes. Coasting is a career killer.

Which comes to where we disagree, you write, “If you continue to plow ahead never in doubt, it indicates that you are either, incompetent, or out of touch with the reality of local control.”

When I walk onto a campus that is in crisis, if I am not supremely confident in my ability (which I am) to get that campus turned around rapidly, in order to help students and save careers (which I do), that is a dead school walking.

Again, great questions and points, keep them coming!

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

Great Advice - Col. Hunter Wisdom

When I was middle school and high school, before summer football practice would begin, I would go and spend a week with my uncle to get ready for the season. My uncle, a retired Marine fighter pilot and successful businessman would push me and my cousin to be ready both physically and mentally. When we were running hills at 5:30 in the morning, hoping not to puke and wanting to quit; right when I would think that I could go no further, he would be in my ear saying,

"Being great is based on how much pain you can endure."

This is brilliant advice, always given when it was needed the most. It was given right when I had a choice, quit and remain average, or find just enough guts to keep going to have the chance to perhaps experience “great.”

Uncle Harold understood Marzano, before Marzano did. His reinforcement of my effort not only kept me working at that moment, but helped me build habits that I still rely on to this day. You may be smarter, faster, richer and better looking than me. You may beat me soundly and often. But, I’ll never willingly and knowingly let you outwork me.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Just a reminder for existing LYS readers and an invitation to new LYS readers, Sunday is advice day. Send me your favorite piece of advice and why, along with your mailing address. If I post it, I’ll send you a world famous Lead Your School can koozie.

Your turn...

A Reader Writes... Spoke Too Soon

A reader/contributor writes:

“I see that Commissioner Robert Scott shut down Pearce Middle School! I have to eat my words now! Too bad it took five years of kids getting the short end of the stick to make this happen.”

SC Response
Yet the story hasn’t ended yet, local political leaders are still trying to save the school. They are using the same old excuses.

Excuse #1: “We need more time.” So evidently after 5+ years of horrific results, they almost have it figured out.

Excuse #2: “We’ve made progress.” They can't face the reality that in the 5+ years that it has taken the campus to go from failing miserably, to just failing, means that they are harming students at a wholesale level.

Here is what we (both the LYS company and the LYS network) know: In terms of adding value and performance growth – Some schools outperform most schools; and some teachers out perform most teachers. To be the “one of the some” requires the right tools, a singular focus on students, the discipline of an extra-ordinary work ethic, and the willingness to engage in the fight against aggressive ignorance.

If you haven’t done it in five years, you aren’t going to do it at all. And it is being done, right now. Here are a few examples:

• John Montelongo (a Brezina and Brown Guy) just took Fox Tech High School from “unacceptable” to “recognized,” in two years.

• Mike Seabolt (a Brezina and Brown Guy) took Blue Ridge High School from “unacceptable” to “recognized’” in less than two years.

• And at a district level, Tommy Price and Mike Laird (both Brezina and Brown Guys) now have the following results: When they took over the district two years ago, they inherited 4 “acceptable” campuses and 1 “unacceptable” campus. Now, they have 1 “exemplary” campus, 3 “recognized” campuses and 1 “acceptable” campus. And, pay attention to this, the “EXEMPLARY” campus is the one that started out as “UNACCPETABLE.”

Time is not the critical factor for improving schools, but time does doom students.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

A Reader Writes... (Brezina and Brown Advice Combined)

In response to the post that combined Brezina’s and Brown’s advice, a reader writes:

“I totally agree with Cain on the issue of politics. However, the principal does not have the luxury of setting the priorities of the district. As Cain has mentioned, and I agree with him, we need to shift the focus from the Superintendents to the people who are leading the service, the Principals. But until this happens principals are at the mercy of superintendents, which in the vast majority of cases translates to politics. I am not suggesting principals should bow to politics, just that they must be situational aware, and every situation has its own DNA. There are certainly times I wish the State would come in and help, but I have yet to see it.

As another Brown guy, M.L., once pointed out, he would just LOVE to see the State of Texas actually do something, just once. Of the recent times the State of Texas has taken direct action, it seems governance and money were the issues, not kids. With the two most blatant examples being Wilmer-Hutchins ISD and North Forest ISD.

I will say to everyone, pay special attention to Cain’s take on speed, especially items 2 and 3. Those are real jewels, that will make or break you.

SC Response
Two points that I want to add.

1. You are right about the Superintendent setting the priorities of the district. But the principal drives the priorities of the campus (refer to Brown's rule on the principal's role). Depending on your skills, past success, and willingness to get bloodied and bruised, as a principal, you can bend district priorities to best meet the needs of your campus and your students. Brezina not only tolerated this, he expected it. When he moved me up to run all of his schools he told me, “A good principal is difficult to manage. A great principal is damn near impossible to manage.”

That being said, you can only fight central office for as long as central office let’s you fight them (Brezina expected it, that's why he hired you. 96% of you don't have the luxury of working for someone like Brezina). There are school leaders who can work for organizations and there are school leaders who can work for individuals. Take my career, I worked for individuals. The skill set I bring to the table is critical for speed and change. Qualities that some leaders appreciate and most organizations are uncomfortable with. The key is to understand who you are and put yourself in the situations where you are most effective.

2. In regards to the State of Texas taking action against bad schools, yes, the the pace is entirely too slow. And the process is driven by politics. However, sanctions and closures do occur. With your example districts, WHISD and NFISD, money and governance issues were the levers that let the state act. But, it was the disservice to students that got the state’s attention. Also, this is the perfect illustration of the individual vs. organization orientation I discussed above. The organization, T.E.A., has long had the authority to address cancerous districts and campuses, but still doesn’t have the organizational will. Dr. Neely had the will.

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn…

A Reader Writes... (Comments on Brown's Wisdom)

In response to the comments and commentary dealing with, “Brown's Wisdom,” a reader writes:

“I completely agree that there are different types of principals. The reality of this is that no matter what type of principal you work with, a team makes the difference. True leaders grow leaders. The principal may be the nucleus, but a team of strong administrators can guide and lead teachers to lead in their classrooms.”

SC Response
What I feel sometimes gets lost in this forum, but what I always emphasize when I present, is that yes, the principal is the big picture catalyst for positive movement and change. But, leadership at every level has to step up and move their teams to aggressively meet student needs.

The tenured teacher who is respected by the staff has a responsibility to use his/her influence to keep teachers focused on improving the craft. The department chair has the responsibility to actually lead the department. The assistant principal has to keep her team focused on providing quality service and instruction. In the long run, campus leadership is a team sport.

Can a principal do it alone? In the short run, yes. But, for a campus to operate at a consistently high level, over time, leadership must be multi-layered, mission oriented, and willing to engage. If as the principal, I am not working everyday to build that level of embedded leadership capacity, my efforts will not survive my departure. And, I have to ask myself, “Am I actually leading?”

If as a support leader, I am not focused on moving my team forward, supporting the mission of the organization, and making the tough decisions that are within my pay grade, I am a liability to the organization. And, I have to ask myself, “Is this really what I want to do?”

Think. Work. Achieve.

Your turn...

A Reader Writes... (Brezina, Brown and Recent Comments)

In response to the posts that relate to Brezina’s and Brown’s rules and advice, a reader writes:

“The last writer is hitting in the right zone, but let’s integrate the advice of Brezina and Brown.
From Brezina:
‘I believe how you fix a problem depends upon the situation you are in, each ISD has its own DNA and how you fix it in one school can be different in the next. I will be speaking to the, then what?’

People take jobs for a variety of reasons. Sometimes they need a job. Sometimes they want to be assistant principal, or principal, or superintendent, and take the jobs available to them.
People leave jobs for a variety of reasons. Sometimes they are moving on to bigger things. Sometimes they find the district they are in has a DNA that can’t be tolerated. Sometimes life just throws us unusual curve balls and personal tragedies that change circumstances.

Also consider Brown’s condition:
“The principal as the only pure advocate for the student.”

I take this as true, as I do everything E. Don tells me. Now consider this as how I synthesize Brezina and Brown together:

You can’t be a student advocate if they fire you. You can only make changes and advocate for students if you have a seat at the table of power. How much of a seat you have varies. Some districts I know of support principals when they non-renew 40% of their staff. Some districts won’t support you if you discipline one teacher. Your mileage may vary, so you had best know your vehicle (school).

People learn at certain rates. You can not make people learn faster than they want to or are capable of. This applies to PEOPLE, i.e. students, teachers, principals, superintendents, boards.
You can try to motivate anyone to learn (move, if you will) faster, but you will eventually reach THEIR limit. At that point your choices are very much limited by how much support you have at the seats of power, which is never constant, I will add. If you don’t like this, you can either be patient or move on to a district that is ready to move at your pace. Good luck. Know that you can get caught between the Devil and deep blue sea with patience. If your school has to make rapid changes or else face state sanctions, your future depends greatly on the DNA of the district. You have to move forward, or else. Remember in the classic western “Shane,” Shane knew he couldn’t stay after he cleaned up the town. In education, I refer to this as the “Shane Syndrome”. Doing good deeds may or may not save your rear end.

I say all of this for a reason. There is a need for balance, as determined by your districts DNA. If you exceed that balance, they will certainly fire you, even if you are successful in some cases.

If the balance if so out of kilter you can’t adjust to the districts messed up way of doing things, do as Brezina says and leave on your own terms, and I would add QUICK. Understand that in all districts to maintain a seat at the table of power you will in some way have to stroke what is important to many others at the table, which again includes in this order:

1 - Politics
2 - Money
3 - Kids

You may not like this, I certainly don’t. But if you forget it, those with more power than you will remove you from the table of power, and then see how much of an advocate you can be for kids. So, moving full speed ahead varies depending on whether you are in a VW Bug or a Corvette. Push your vehicle as hard as you can, and if it doesn’t run like you think it should, find yourself another vehicle."

SC Response:
Just some random thoughts related to the above comments.

First, politics. When I was working for the Great State of Texas, I was meeting with the Superintendent of a very large district that was in trouble. This Superintendent took pride in his reputation as a politician. I was there to explain in no uncertain terms, that the clock was ticking. Frustrated, that I would not yield, he said, “Well, the Commissioner never had to deal with politics like this.”

To which I responded, “I have worked with lots of Superintendents. The ones that I have to clean up after are the ones who worry about the politics first. The ones that put students first, like Neeley and Brezina, never seems to find themselves in this position.”

Politics are always an issue, but when you put students first, and have results to showcase, the next (if necessary) job will find you.

Second, speed: Learning is not the critical factor I am looking for, engagement is. Get people to engage rapidly and the learning will follow. If you can’t generate any engagement, you are a dead man walking. So how do you generate rapid engagement? Here are some helpful cliché’s. However, as Fullan argues, it is the artful understanding of the nuance that drives the success of any rule. So understand that just because this worked for me, it may not work for you.

1 - Live and execute the principle that you are ‘frequently wrong, but never in doubt.’ I learned this early. I was a quarterback. When I called the play in the huddle, if I didn’t exude the complete confidence that there was no better play for the situation than the one called, we were stopped before the ball was snapped. If you are not supremely confident, your staff will hedge their bets. Now, ‘frequently wrong,’ this is the hard to do side of the equation. No one is always right, and the more dynamic the situation, the more likely that you will be wrong. Know that up front and look to constantly adjust. Again, from my quarterback days, we ran a triple option. That meant that the play evolved based on what the defense did. Every time we were wrong, we adjusted, at full speed.

2 - Always sell. You have to constantly be out with your people, selling them on what is being done and why it is being done. If you don’t, know one else will sell the message you need sold. Instead they will sell their own message. The message that furthers their agenda. And as we know, the connection of that replacements agenda to the betterment of students can be tenuous.

3 - Love is conditional. That’s right, conditional. Your staff needs to know that when they do right, they get all your love (and make sure it is a lot). When they do wrong, they get no love until they do right again (there should be a noticeable difference between love and no love). Interestingly, a nun taught me this.

Third, reaching the limit of individual staff. Yes, this happens. Sometimes, the issue is not willingness, but aptitude. This is where attrition is powerful. Todd Whitaker writes, “The most valuable asset a principal has is a staff vacancy,” and he is absolutely right.
Use attrition to increase the capacity of the organization. And realize that everyone is not a “Superstar.” That is why you have to work on the system and provide your staff with the tools they need to survive. When I design district and campus systems, this is my intent. 1 - Expose the frauds. 2 – Get the weak to average. 3 – Get the average to strong. 4 – Get the strong to great. 5 – Be able to reload without moving backwards.

Finally, when you are in a “no win” situation, you have to “out work, out think, and out achieve” the competition. If you lose, you get to leave with your head held high, but there is a good chance you may pull out a win. Most people are lazy and don’t have the commitment to finish the job, especially is the job is messy or uncomfortable. Use this to your advantage.

Out Work. Out Think. Out Achieve.

Your turn…