Effective leadership involves a range of activities, including creating a mission, setting strategy, motivating others, and building a positive culture. But as stated by Goleman (2000), “the leader’s singular job is to get results” (p. 78). And this is as true in education as in any other field.
However, it is only through a continued focus on outcomes and results that any leader can tell whether his or her efforts are the right ones, and can make adjustments accordingly. Ulrich, Zenger, and Smallwood (1999) outline a series of steps that leaders can take to become more results focused. Ulrich suggests that the focus should be on results, clear communication of targets and expectations, and using the personal and social resources that the members bring to the group. He recommends experimentation and innovation and the pursuit of new ways of enhancing performance. For him, seeking feedback from others to facilitate improvement is expected of leaders.
The actions proposed by Ulrich and his colleagues reflect some of the key imperatives for achieving desired outcomes in any organization. These include focus, taking responsibility, communicating clearly, utilizing talent and building capacity, innovating, and seeking feedback. The actions include reliance on the team and providing motivation for continuous improvement of outcomes.
It is important for leaders to spend time reflecting on their careers in education. It is a quest to determine the impact they have had on people and organizations. Leaders engage in reflection, asking whether they made good decisions, whether they advanced the goals of their province or state and the organizations for which they worked, and, most important, whether they treated people with the dignity and respect that are consistent with their values and beliefs. It is a questioning of whether or not they reached the heart of leadership.
Some leaders do seek out feedback. But we do know that the higher up we go in organizations, the less likely it is for people to provide us with open, honest feedback. But leaders must make an effort to solicit comments from people so that they can assess the impact they are having on others’ work. It also means that leaders should not expect gratitude or validation. It is a pleasure when this happens, but it should not be a quid pro quo of leadership.
John Hattie’s Visible Learning research (2009) has provided definitive findings for educators on what works best in education. We no longer have to guess about what constitutes effective practices. Hattie has helped educators shift the focus in education away from initiatives and mandates and toward creating assessment-capable, high-achieving learners. This framework is the most expansive, powerful, proven, and unprecedented educational research base in the world, empowering educators to examine evidence, take action, create an impact, and change the narrative of modern education.
Individuals who attend Hattie’s training sessions, conferences, and workshops have an opportunity to focus on the evidence base of Hattie and other thought leaders, along with the actions of teachers around the world; to understand the impact that educators are having on student outcomes; and to learn from the experiences of educators around the world who have put Visible Learning methods into practice. These sessions, which I have had the pleasure of experiencing, help educators understand the school and classroom factors that most influence student performance. They also help educators learn about the latest learning innovations and groundbreaking research on what works best in improving student achievement, along with strategies for transforming student outcomes through instructional leadership, identifying and monitoring learning intentions, and overcoming the challenges and barriers to creating Visible Learning schools. Finally, these sessions allow educators to become part of the global education network that is changing the way we think and talk about teaching and learning in the 21st century.
In reflecting on our careers, one focus has to be on the impact we have had on people and how their lives have been affected. Reaching the heart of leadership is not about fulfilling personal ambitions, nor about pursuing well-crafted agendas. It is ultimately about service—to others and to our society.
In describing this philosophy, we must consider the fundamental questions that Robert Greenleaf (1977) asked. He used the term “servant leadership” in the 1970s, when I did my initial postgraduate studies and began to look critically into the practice of leadership. The takeaway for leaders has to be the question of who benefits from our leadership. Greenleaf also challenged us to make sure that no one is further disadvantaged as a result of our leadership; instead, people should continue to be further enhanced and continue to grow as individuals and professionals.
Still another focus of Reaching the Heart of Leadership is to recognize our responsibilities and privileges. One way to do this is to recognize what the privilege of professionalism entails. One of the lessons I have learned—and, indeed, one of my conclusions I have arrived at—is that leadership is a privilege, a responsibility, and a moral imperative. And particularly when there is unequal distribution of power, as discussed earlier, the relationship does become a moral one. That moral imperative helps us treat people as we want to be treated, and to ensure that the best of who we are as human beings comes to the fore in the workplace and all other settings in which we are seen as leaders with influence.
My ultimate conclusion is that leadership is a privilege—a privilege of professionalism. The person who said this best, to my mind, was Albert Shanker, the legendary president of the Federation of Teachers in the United States. He said:
We do not have the right to be called professionals and we will never convince the public that we are unless we are prepared honestly to decide what constitutes competence and incompetence in our profession and apply those definitions to ourselves and to our colleagues. (1985)
I have also spent a lot of time over the course of my career to reflect on the characteristics of a profession. Three points are worth mentioning if, as professionals, we are to reach the heart of leadership. These include the issue of high standards, the balance of professional autonomy with accountability, and the fact that members must be seen as acting in the interest of their “clients.”
High standards means that we uphold the highest ideals of our profession and constantly strive to raise the bar of performance and achievement for ourselves and others. Balancing professional autonomy with accountability is also very important, especially during these times of an increased call for greater responsibility from parents, politicians, and other stakeholders. One is reminded of Fullan’s (1989) exhortation that there is no such thing as isolated autonomy. As public servants, we cannot close our doors and do our own thing. We must always be open to criticism and scrutiny and must be prepared to listen and improve. After all, one of the stages in the development of a profession is that there is increasing demand and public expectation for quality in the services provided. If we say we believe in continuous improvement, we should welcome this challenge, recognizing that arrogance and indifference to input and feedback are anathema to the kind of responsiveness that is required of public “servants” today.
Acting in the interest of the client is one of the most important tenets of one’s professionalism. It represents fidelity to the sacred bond we forge in our relationship with people if we are to be worthy of their trust and confidence in our skills, intentions, and actions. It requires being nonjudgmental, while at the same time being willing to point out and confront the behaviors that may thwart the goals you have jointly identified. It also means that the needs of individuals must be preeminent, superseding all other interests.
When teachers and principals act in the interest of their “clients,” it means that they put the children first. In this regard, I am reminded of the statement of Jackson in his report on declining enrollment in Ontario (Connelly, Enns, & Jackson, 1979), who exhorted everyone not to lose sight of the fact that the child, as the learner, is the center of the school system and the only reason for its existence. Some may argue as to whether our students are our clients. But that question is not important at all. Simply put, student needs and aspirations must be main drivers of decision making in education.
I am by no means suggesting that we become servile, submissive, or subservient. After all, I discussed earlier the importance of assertiveness as a leadership competence. Nor am I suggesting that we accept the abuse that is sometimes leveled at those who work in public institutions. Professionalism certainly does not mean becoming sycophantic. But it does mean being thick skinned and constantly recognizing that we are in the business of service, and that people have the right to assess the quality of the service that we are providing and to provide us with feedback, which we must take seriously.
Reaching the heart of leadership means investing in people and building their capacity to become inveterate learners, truth seekers, and solution finders. It means rediscovering our mission, sharpening our resolve, and focusing on causes outside of ourselves. More important, it means addressing the needs of students and building the capacity of the people who attend to and support them.
Leadership Lessons Learned