Thursday 7 September 2017

Week 8 - LEADERSHIP - Leading Change

Management or Leadership?
My attempt to use coggle.it
Good to use as a reflective tool

Paul's effort to coggle.it



The simple insight that management is not leadership is better understood today, but not nearly as well as is needed. Management makes a system work. It helps you do what you know how to do. Leadership builds systems or transforms old 
School Vision Statements  
Prior to the class, please bring your own school vision statement and post it in the relevant padlet for your location.
Our school vision Mahi Tahi, Whakaaro Tahi, Akoako Tahi, Working Together, Thinking Together, Learning Together

Kotter's 8 step Process
Kotter (1996) suggests that there is an 8 step process for leading change.
  1. Create a sense of urgency (identify crises and opportunities)
  2. Build a guiding team
  3. Develop a vision and strategy
  4. Communicate the vision
  5. Enable action by removing barriers
  6. Creating and celebrating short term wins
  7. Sustain change by building on gains
  8. Embed the change in culture
There is a useful diagram that summarises Kotter's process:
In reality, even successful change efforts are messy and full of surprises. But just as a relatively simple vision is needed to guide people through a major change, so a vision of the change process can reduce the error rate. And fewer errors can spell the difference between success and failure (Kotter, 1995).
Coherence
Effective leadership, rather than focusing primarily on a specific aspect of change, focuses on creating the conditions in which everyone in the group is able to envision and enact cohesion:
“Coherence consists of the shared depth of understanding about the purpose and nature of the work” (Fullan & Quinn, 2016, p.1). 
In challenging situations, people are motivated primarily by intrinsic factors: having a sense of purpose, solving difficult problems, and working with peers on issues that are of critical importance to the group (Fullan & Quinn, 2016, p.4).
Fullan & Quinn identify the elements contained in the diagram below (from Michael Fullen's website)  as the ‘right drivers to bring about system change’ - as opposed to the ‘wrong drivers’ (such as rewarding individual teachers, national standards). 
Coherence-Framework-Extended.png
Why are these wrong drivers still being implemented? Here are some of their suggestions:
Our wrong driver analysis showed how politicians were making matters worse by imposing solutions that were crude and demotivating for the very people who have to help lead the solution … You might ask why politicians endorse solutions that don’t work. The answer is not complicated: because they can legislate them; because they are in a hurry; because the remedies can be made to appeal superficially to the public; because (and unkindly on our part) some of them really don’t care about the public education system, preferring that education to be taken over by the private sector; and (more kindly) because they do not know what else to do (Fullan & Quinn, 2016, p. 3).
Simplexity means that you take a difficult problem and identify a small number of key factors (about four to six) – this is the simple part. And then you make these factors gel under the reality of action with its pressures, politics, and personalities in the situation – this is the complex part (Fullan & Quinn, 2016, p. 127).
Leaders build coherence when they combine the four components of our Coherence Framework to meet the varied needs of the complex organizations they lead. Coherence making is a forever job because people come and go, and the situational dynamics are always in flux …The main threat to coherence is turnover at the top with new leaders who come in with their own agenda. It is not turnover per se that is the problem, but rather discontinuity of direction (Fullan & Quinn, 2016, p.128).
Change Management Toolkit
This week one of our resources (in the portal) comes from the New Zealand Post Primary Teachers' Association / Te Wehengarua (PPTA). Their Education Change Management Toolkit has been developed to assist schools in implementing effective change for improvement, following identified best practices for educational change.
The toolkit contains general principles for implementing successful education change in schools and a series of questions to answer before, during and after a change is trialled and includes a draft policy which branches can discuss with their boards.
See the following web page for more information and a link to the full document (which is also in this week's media): http://ppta.org.nz/resources/publication-list/2460...
References
Fullan, M. & Miles, M. (1992). Getting reform right: what works and what doesn't. Phi Delta Kappan73(10), 745-752.
Fullan, M. & Quinn, J. (2016). Coherence: The Right Drivers in Action for Schools, Districts, and Systems. Thousand Oaks: Corwin. 
Kotter, J. (1995). Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Harvard Business Review. March-April 1995, 59-67.
Kotter, J. (1996). Leading Change. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business Review Press.
Maeroff, G. (1993). Building teams to rebuild schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 74(7), 512-519.
OnGuard. (2016). 8 steps to managing change. Retrieved from: http://onguard.com/process/8-steps-managing-change/
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: the art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Currency Doubleday. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Change in My Professional Practice

Week 32 Key change in my professional practice It is quite a nice way to finish the last entry in this collection of reflective blogs lo...