Getty Images
This past July, a number of new superintendents started their jobs. Regardless of whether they came from outside the district or were promoted from within, most of them gave their boards a “100-day plan” and spent the summer engaging with internal and external stakeholders. This is typical. Leaders who are new to a position need to spend some time getting to know the organization. Even when they’re expected to make bold, transformational change, they still need to get comfortable with the view from the top seat.
These first 100 days are about entry, when the leader and stakeholders get to know each other, their values, and their stories. This entry period is essential to building the foundation for transition, which is about the entire organization moving from one state of being to another. Transition and entry may coincide, but the former takes much longer than the latter. However, in my opinion, too many leaders focus on entry and fail to engage in a thoughtful and comprehensive transition process.
Every time I start a new job, I read William Bridges’ book Managing Transitions. and I find myself returning to its lessons and wisdom even after being in the position for a while. I also use it when I coach new superintendents. I’ve seen firsthand how superintendents, their boards, and their communities can benefit from a transition process based on Bridges’ ideas.
According to Bridges, the basic tenets of a good transition attend to both what it means for an organization and the people in it and how the leader organizes the process.
Understanding the landscape
The first thing that leaders need to understand about transition is that not all people are in the same place. Psychologically, transition is made up of three phases: letting go, the neutral zone, and the new beginning. A school board will likely be much further ahead than the rest of the district, as it has been planning for a new superintendent for months and is ready to move forward. District employees may take a wait-and-see attitude or be attached to the outgoing leader. And families and community members may not even pay attention until something catches their interest. Meeting people where they are in the transition is important when beginning a new job.
I’ve always found one of Bridges’ more compelling ideas to be recognizing the loss that comes with transition. Since transition is all about an organization taking on a new form, loss is inevitable. Transition isn’t just about change. Yes, some old ways of doing business will cease and new ones will begin. However, an organizational transition is also specifically about how people act differently in the face of changed circumstances. Even if people are ready and eager to embrace the new beginning, they still lose their old way of doing business. For those who resist the new or are just unsure of what it means for them, their sense of loss can manifest in active opposition to a leader’s new ideas.
Consider what might happen when a new superintendent tries to change the district culture to be less top-down and more collaborative. The previous superintendent was dictatorial and ruled by fiat and fear. Folks in schools and the community had little say in decision making and no ownership for actions and results. Transforming this district’s culture requires creating new structures, processes, and practices. Advisory groups need to be established to gather input in curriculum and budgeting decisions. Teachers should be organized into professional learning communities (PLC) to increase their professional learning and leverage their expertise. During all of this, the superintendent spends a lot of time in the community and in schools talking to folks about what they want and getting buy-in to a vision of collaboration and engagement. People feel good about the new direction and espouse their support for working together on behalf of young people.
Meeting people where they are in the transition is important when beginning a new job.
But then something happens. Teachers who are now in PLCs realize that they’re losing some autonomy to make their own decisions about what to teach and how to assess. Principals who clamored to be part of district-level decision making but followed the previous superintendent’s lead and made top-down decisions are now expected to engage their teachers, parents, and students in the process. Central office leaders must be more transparent about their programmatic and resource allocation decisions. All of these people wanted to feel more a part of the team and collaborate with one another, and many decried the previous leader’s approach. But they’re also experiencing a sense of loss over their old practices. Moreover, they may find learning new practices difficult and uncomfortable. The new superintendent in this situation must then not only focus on the value of the new approach but also recognize that even if people voice their commitment to and desire for it, they’re losing something in the process.
Organizing for change
In addition to understanding the psychological aspects of transition, a new superintendent must also organize a strategy to manage the process. I’ve seen and experienced a few key components of effective strategies.
Transparency is an important part of an effective transition strategy. Leaders need to be clear about what they’re doing, with whom, and when. They need to be clear about the problem they’re trying to solve, the criteria for who’s going to help in the process, who’s going to be spoken to, what data will be reviewed, and what the timelines are for gathering information, meeting with people, and reporting out.
A transition team of inside stakeholders and outside experts should be established to collect data and create a plan for change. The team should be broken down into committees, each with a clear charge to focus on critical issues facing the district, such as operations, teaching and learning, community engagement, and equity. Committees should be around 12 people each, with participants chosen by the superintendent and leaders and key stakeholders within the district. For instance, the head of the district PTA might be on the community engagement committee, or the teacher’s association leader could choose a few teachers to be on the teaching and learning committee. Students should absolutely be on the transition team. School board members and other elected officials should not be on the team, as the transition report will be presented to them, and they need a degree of objectivity.
The collection of data can be a sensitive process for a transition team, as many participants will have different perspectives about the challenges facing the district and will want to find the data that supports their beliefs. Ideally, an independent data team or local university partner will gather quantitative and qualitative data to inform team decisions. It’s essential that focus-group input — which is a key part of the data that needs to be collected — is seen as reliable and valid. If the transition team is collecting the data, rather than analyzing it, the results might not be seen as legitimate.
Each committee of the transition team should produce a report, which then gets aggregated into one document. For clarity and consistency, have one person write the final document, which is then presented to the superintendent and their cabinet. Formal heads of employee associations, family, community and student leaders, or other key players should be given a chance to preview the report before it’s publicly presented to the board. The media should be given an embargoed copy just prior to public release, and a copy needs to be posted on the district website as soon as it’s presented. And that’s just the end of the beginning.
Once the report is public, the superintendent needs to ensure that every decision and recommendation (within reason) can be mapped back to the transition plan. It can form the basis of a strategic planning process, and the budget should be aligned to the report. Transition team members should be brought back, both formally and informally, during the first year — and even into the second — to check on progress and gather feedback. Because they were part of the work and feel ownership of it, they can become some of the greatest allies and supporters of the new leader’s agenda. Good leaders will leverage that spirit as they go forward.
As I’ve transitioned into a new phase of my career, after successfully leading the transition of PDK, I’ve had to learn an enormous amount about how a large corporation works. For the first time in 17 years, I have a boss other than a board, which means I must adjust my leadership style. I’ve assumed the mantle of an organization that has a rich legacy and a record of success, yet needs to transition into something that meets the demands of the current — and future — public education environment. When I was a superintendent, it took a few years before the districts truly were ready to embrace our challenges and opportunities. A solid transition process enables a leader to unpack the issues facing the organization and chart a clear course going forward. Good leaders will use it as the foundation for the new work that they’re called to do.
This article appears in the September 2022 issue of Kappan, Vol. 104, No. 1, pp. 58-59.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Joshua P. Starr
Joshua P. Starr is the managing partner at the International Center for Leadership in Education, a division of HMH, based in Boston, MA. He is the author of Equity-based Leadership: Leveraging Complexity to Transform School Systems.
