Appointing Senior Managers in Education
Homosociability, local logics and authenticity in the selection process
Authors: B. Gummell, D. Devine, and K. Lynch (BELMAS, 2009)
Summary: Dr Stephen Whitehead
In the months leading up to writing this article I’d occasion to have rather intense discussions with a number of senior leaders in international education (Philippines, Vietnam, Japan, Thailand, China) each of whom was involved either in applying for a new senior leadership post or had recently acquired one.
Their nationalities were American, Filipino, British, Thai, and Vietnamese. Different nationalities but with the same concern – seeking to ensure they made the right decision and where having made it, making the most of it.
I was not acting in any professional (consultancy) capacity only as a critical friend.
Certain things struck me about these slightly different professional scenarios, probably the most salient being that the whole process of senior leadership appointments, certainly in international schooling, is much more about reputation and networks than it is about objective assessment and logic. For example, not one of the individuals had seen a post advertised and applied for it. Each had first been approached by an intermediary, or the actual vacancy appointee, suggesting they do so.
Am I suggesting, therefore, that as far as IS careers are concerned, who you know matters more than what you know?
Not at all.
Well, not in the case of these individuals, each of whom is an accomplished educational leader.
What I am suggesting is the point made in this article, which is that applicants are chosen primarily on whether or not they will be a ‘good fit’ for the organisation. Though if you were to ask any assessor to define what they mean by a ‘good fit’ I doubt you’d get a coherent and enlightening answer.
“Applicants were expected to demonstrate and embody the ethos or characteristic spirit of the school but identifying these qualities in the selection process can be quite elusive…Assessors outlined a range of personal criteria that they associated with leadership positions. Candidates were expected to embody these qualities or ‘manage their insides’ as they internalised these qualities into their identities and presentation of self.’ (p. 10/13)
Can you see the dilemma here? Probably, not least because you’ve personally experienced it when applying for a job.
That is, you have a sense of your authentic self but worry whether or not this identity will be seen as suitable for the organisation you are applying to. The above quote explicates this dilemma not least in the phrase ‘manage your insides’. In other words, forget about your authentic self, instead you better quickly learn what the organisation is looking for and present yourself as that person.
Some people are very good at doing this ‘appropriate presentation of self’ at interview, but what about afterwards, if you get the job?
Are you going to be able to live with this inauthentic self you so professionally presented to the assessor and who, not unreasonably, now expects you to behave that way 24/7?
You better hope so.
Because this is the person your new employer has just appointed. Â
This is, of course, relevant to most leadership appointments, anywhere. Though within education, and certainly within for-profit international schooling, there is an additional factor.
‘This analysis highlights the tensions that can exist for [education] assessors – and senior managers – as they try to balance increasing performativity and new managerialist demands with the more traditional ethical and moral dimensions of leadership roles in education.’ (p.2)
If you, the applicant, are not familiar with this dilemma, despite applying for a senior leadership post in education, you can be very sure your assessor is. They may not directly ask you at point of interview which position you are personally and professionally orientated towards on the ethic-profit dualism, but you can be sure they will try and find out somehow.
And it is a real dilemma.
So how do assessors attempt to bridge this gap between ethics and profit in education when making senior leadership appointments?
According to this article they generally do so by falling back on two safety nets, ‘local logic’ and ‘homosociability’.
‘Key concepts of ‘local logic’ and ‘homosociability’ frame the analysis as it is shown how assessors often select ‘safe’ candidates according to known and familiar qualities, thereby normalizing particular leadership qualities.’ (p. 2)
Both concepts take us back to the issue of ‘comfortable fit’.
Local logics dictates that the person appointed should ‘understand the nature and values of the institution and community.’
Homosociability dictates that the person appointed should ‘reproduce’ the identity of the dominant social group in the school, thereby ‘guarding access to power and privilege to those who fit in, to those of their own kind.’
Having read that do you still wonder why, for example, so few international schools are headed by openly LGBTQ+ leaders, Black and Asian leaders, women?
This is the problem lurking beneath the surface of talk about diversity, equity, inclusion and justice in society, in organisations, and in international schools. Â
The Research
The research informing this article is based on 23 case studies, consisting of qualitative interviews with recently appointed educational leaders, an interview with one or more assessors from their selection board and analysis of supporting documentation. The country where the research was undertaken is the Irish Republic. The three sectors of Irish education were represented, including (a) 8 primary schools; (b) 8 second level schools; and (c) 7 further and higher education institutions.
A Selection of the Findings
1.    Assessors judged the authenticity of personal qualities through the body language and attitude that candidates expressed throughout the interview.
2.    Assessors described how they were trying to match a candidate’s temperament with the school ethos and value system.
3.    Personal qualities became less important for senior management posts in Higher Education where assessors emphasised strategic vision, status and management skills instead.
4.    Assessors were looking for candidates who would be 100% devoted to the job, implicitly at the exclusion of all else in their lives.
5.    The selection process was very much a social performance and candidates tended to get judged subjectively on that performance.
6.    Female assessors recognised the gender implications of the whole sociability element of the assessment process and which was also contained in the ‘all-encompassing leadership role’ now demanded in education.
7.    The capacity for reflectivity was taken as an indicator of how a candidate would perform in a leadership role.
8.    Professional development and qualifications were considered as important as previous experience of management.
9.    Assessors placed particular importance on interpersonal and communicative skills as a core part of being a senior manager.
10. Reflective of the growth of new managerialism in education, administrative management skills were emphasised across all sectors.
11. A combination of academic skills and respect was not considered important for school principals but essential for senior appointments in HE.
12. Gender was a significant factor as women – and other carers – often lacked the same level of management experience as male candidates.
13. Many assessors found it difficult to decipher rehearsed (coached) from sincere performances at interview.
14. One aspect of homosociability was where assessors sought the comfort and reassurance of locating candidates in a known context – e.g. family background.
15. There was a danger that ‘unfamiliar’ or non-traditional candidates may not be appointed (e.g. women, minority groups, disabled people) due to the sociability factor.
16. Written reference checks were important but more important were verbal reference checks as ‘many people are so wary of putting anything in writing’.
Conclusion
There is much in this article which is worthy of more discussion and analysis, not least by those aspiring to and already in senior leadership positions in education – together with assessors.
But one aspect stands out for me. And that is the near-impossibility of finding the ‘perfect candidate’ for high level senior posts in schools and universities.
The reasons for this are many, but certainly come down to how anyone can be expected to match the expectations for ethic and profitability in all aspects of their work.
And by ethics I mean ‘emotional intelligence and empathy’ and by profit I mean ‘total performative management’.
These two are incompatible. But it is what the assessors in education are now looking for. To put it in gendered terms, an individual who mixes traditional feminine emotional intelligence (reflectivity) with traditional masculine macho leadership (put the job first in one’s life).
Of course, in the end, assessors have to appoint someone. So they go through the motions, often having already decided before the interviews even starts who they prefer, who they have lined up for the job.
And what is the key criteria they use when making this judgement call?
Their gut feeling.
If the fit feels right, they’ll call it as such.
And if it doesn’t, then no amount of skills evidence and experience will change the outcome.
reference
Grummell B, Devine D, Lynch K. Appointing Senior Managers in Education: Homosociability, Local Logics and Authenticity in the Selection Process. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. 2009;37(3):329-349. doi:10.1177/1741143209102783
link
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1741143209102783
INTERESTED IN INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION?
The Teacher’s Guide is getting around!
Seen here in Thailand with a happy reader - and his new best friend. When we said ‘a companion to your international adventure’ we didn’t quite mean that kind of companion!
Grab a copy to take on your own adventure or listen to a short sample here (4 mins).