I have been in leadership for over 16 years and have done all sort of CPD. I've been through courses on running science departments, managing budgets, pastoral leadership and so on but what all of these had in common was that they were trying to turn me into a technician, turn me into someone who could do a specific job, turn me into an exact copy of anyone else on the course. Unfortunately this seems not be uncommon in leadership development at any level, the aim being to produce leader clones who all operate in the same way.
I have a problem with this. Consider this; you wouldn't take 16 teachers into M&S and make all of them fit a 34" waist pair of black trousers! Maybe 1 or 2 of the them might fit but they are 16 individuals, all different, all unique. We wouldn't try to squeeze our leaders into the same garment so why on earth would we attempt to squeeze them into the same form of leadership. My belief is that you mould leadership around the leader rather than forcing a leader into a mould. Of course if you believe that leadership is simply a set of common behaviours, characteristics and attitudes then you won't agree with me, and you'll probably find yourself wondering why we can't find leaders in education. If however you're with me on this one, you will recognise that leadership is first and foremost a human process, a relationship-led structure in which individuals work with each other in certain capacities to achieve a desirable goal (in our case the education of children).
Some may want all aspiring leaders to be the same, I want exactly the opposite, I want them all to be different.
Leadership certainly has a core set of attitudes and behaviours but these have to be reimagined and practiced by the individual. A simple way of looking at it is to compare a Van Gogh and a Manet, give them the same paints and you'll get two very different pictures, both masterpieces in their own right but very different. I want our attitude to leadership development to be the same, let's give our leaders the same palette but let them paint their own picture.
An approach like this would assert that leaders are not formed but they emerge. They should use their own personalities to shape their practice rather than the personality of an author preaching a certain leadership model. A leader is more authentic if they are themselves rather than someone they are not. Leadership training should focus on behaviours, attitudes and values rather than specific processes. Encourage reflective practice where the leader is a learner rather than prescriptive practice where the leader is a transmitter of received knowledge.
So I don't think you need a course on being a Head of Maths or a Head of Year, leadership development is about incubating leadership so that when it emerges it can fill any role it encounters.
I have a problem with this. Consider this; you wouldn't take 16 teachers into M&S and make all of them fit a 34" waist pair of black trousers! Maybe 1 or 2 of the them might fit but they are 16 individuals, all different, all unique. We wouldn't try to squeeze our leaders into the same garment so why on earth would we attempt to squeeze them into the same form of leadership. My belief is that you mould leadership around the leader rather than forcing a leader into a mould. Of course if you believe that leadership is simply a set of common behaviours, characteristics and attitudes then you won't agree with me, and you'll probably find yourself wondering why we can't find leaders in education. If however you're with me on this one, you will recognise that leadership is first and foremost a human process, a relationship-led structure in which individuals work with each other in certain capacities to achieve a desirable goal (in our case the education of children).
Some may want all aspiring leaders to be the same, I want exactly the opposite, I want them all to be different.
Leadership certainly has a core set of attitudes and behaviours but these have to be reimagined and practiced by the individual. A simple way of looking at it is to compare a Van Gogh and a Manet, give them the same paints and you'll get two very different pictures, both masterpieces in their own right but very different. I want our attitude to leadership development to be the same, let's give our leaders the same palette but let them paint their own picture.
An approach like this would assert that leaders are not formed but they emerge. They should use their own personalities to shape their practice rather than the personality of an author preaching a certain leadership model. A leader is more authentic if they are themselves rather than someone they are not. Leadership training should focus on behaviours, attitudes and values rather than specific processes. Encourage reflective practice where the leader is a learner rather than prescriptive practice where the leader is a transmitter of received knowledge.
So I don't think you need a course on being a Head of Maths or a Head of Year, leadership development is about incubating leadership so that when it emerges it can fill any role it encounters.