This is a summary of a talk given by Martin Kuhne of Ibis Associates in Bremen to an audience of small business advisors in September 2004.

Background

One of most serious barriers that a growing company faces is to resolve problem of information flow – upwards, downwards, and sideways which is often grandly termed communication. This problem can cut in at a very early stage – Ibis staff have personal experience of dangerously limited communication in an enterprise of six individuals! As effectiveness of communication declines, staff (and other stakeholders) become:

Less clear about what is expected of them; Less sure about exactly what is going on throughout company; More suspicious of motives and less willing to accept change; Poorer quality decision makers; More likely to become departmentally rather than company minded with an emphasis on NIH (Not invented here); More inward looking and more task orientated.

The combination of these factors means that policy implementation and task completion slows – or in worst cases stops, labour turnover, absenteeism, disciplinary problems go up, productivity goes down.

Research suggests that most supervisory staff and management have a clear, but limited view of communication. This is to tell stakeholders what they (that is supervisors/ managers) want them to hear – and not to create a series of functional two way channels which improve reactivity within enterprise, lead to much better decision making, and create enhanced shared values for all stakeholders. There is no single magic component – managers cannot wave a wand and say “let there be communication” - because a business is made up of a complex interaction of individuals both within and outside enterprise, there are many communication channels, and effective communication will comprise their interaction. As with all Ibis suggestions, we see creation of this improved communication system as incremental – companies can steadily introduce more and more components, ensure that they work, and then move on to others.

Some pointers to improved communication

All research shows that stakeholders like to be informed – they may not take in information, but respond with trust to enterprise that is trusting them with information. A useful analogy is with Freedom of Information legislation – think about making communication inclusive rather than exclusive. Individuals are very poor at separating wheat from chaff in information, which leads to information overload for some – unless system is properly planned. Individuals differ in way that they take in information – some require voice (and individual contact), others require image while others prefer print. The broader range of communication channels, better overall information that individuals within enterprise will receive. Libraries have not evolved in way they work by accident. Most of have an idea that relevant information existed and go looking for it. Make sure that information is available in an organised and accessible way – a key feature of an effective management information system. Few individuals take in all information at one presentation. The analogy to advertising messages is also relevant to information – each individual will require a minimum of messages to receive underlying information. Advertising has another lesson for communication – make sure that everything that is communicated is legal, decent and honest. You can sell anything once – to employees and other stakeholders – but once you have done this wrongly – your communication system will never be trusted again. Commitment from top, like all others aspects of company management is essential. Employees will become rapidly aware if senior management words are not linked to their deeds.

Changing from a disorganised to organised communication system

What must be accepted by growing organisation is that informal system of talking to colleagues across table in shared office will no longer work as more and more employees join enterprise and number of external stakeholders increase. Certain researchers refer to this as “platform” - we see it as a steady movement away from resolving structural problems towards operational concerns.

Exactly when this will happen will vary, but it is clear that once organisation passes beyond point where team leaders can maintain informal contact with all individuals on a daily basis, enterprise needs to increasingly rely on a mixture of three different types of channel:

Formal; Formal/ informal; Informal

Let us take one example of each to clarify distinction between three. Strictly formal methods of communication would include a company newsletter which would provide clearly defined information to employees and possibly other stakeholders as well. Formal/ informal methods are those where company establishes a formal framework within which informal communication can occur. A classic example is creation of a company canteen/ coffee area which is designed to provide a relaxing atmosphere – in which discussions are encouraged. Truly informal communication would include techniques such as management by walking about.

It is Ibis experience that majority of emphasis in development of communication policy should concentrate on formal and formal/ informal techniques. It is very difficult to change specific management styles or attitudes – some individuals can naturally handle management by walking about – others cannot – so any attempt to legislate for this will be doomed to failure, and be counter-productive.

Three elements are important to summarise main options for improving communication: what is channel, what can it do to improve communication/ decision making, and how rapidly it should be introduced into growing company. The components are shown in table form below. Many of these elements are either part of or comprise an entire standard operating procedure of 68 that Ibis currently have available.

The need to closely manage many parts of communication mix

INTRODUCTION

In June 1997,the Prime Minister of Singapore unveiled Government’s vision of ‘Thinking Schools, Learning Nation’ (TSLN). This vision was forged to improve Singapore’s education system in light of rapid changes around world. The Government foresees that Singapore, with its limited natural resources, can only continue to progress by nurturing a knowledgeable workforce that is adaptable to changes in world economy. More importantly, Government realized that it had to start preparing nation for these inevitable changes by revamping education system in accordance with vision of TSLN.

The Ministry of Education (MOE) in Singapore, state agency responsible for undertaking of this vision, states goals of TSLN as follows:

Thinking Schools ensure that we equip students with skills and knowledge and values and instincts to face future challenges, while Learning Nation aims to promote a culture of continual learning beyond school environment. (MOE, 1998,p.16)

In order to realize vision, MOE has introduced changes to curriculum, training of teachers, assessment modes and development of resource packages. Furthermore, all schools will have students spending at least 30% of their curriculum time accessing electronic resources and working on computers. (MOE, 1998,p.17) The changes in curriculum include infusion of thinking skills and reduction in contents of curriculum. Schools are strongly encouraged to set up their own thinking programs and teachers are to enroll in courses to learn how to infuse thinking skills in their teaching.

With restructuring taking place to realize vision, most teachers fear that changes will burden them by increasing their already-heavy workload and tight time schedule due to increased training hours. The principal, being main disseminator of MOE’s mission of TSLN in school, has unenviable task to articulate this vision to overcome resistance to changes especially from school’s teachers.

The main objective of paper is to explore perceptions of teachers as to effectiveness of principals in leading a change programs (in this case, a Thinking Programs). Since teachers are directly responsible for learning outcomes of students, their perceptions of their principals’ effectiveness and concomitant actions are vital to success of vision of TSLN. As part of paper, a case study of a primary school, which has embarked on a Thinking Programs, has been carried out.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

In hope of improving existing system, schools face many problems when introducing well-meaning changes. Restructuring would, inevitably, involve people within organisation to absorb new ideas and ideals that usually result in many uncertainties (Heckman, 1990). A school’s principal, thus, has uphill task to manage level of resistance to change and align staff to work towards a common vision, amidst turbulence.

To reiterate, author is focussing on teachers’ perceptions of their principal in leading change, more specifically, process of creating a Thinking Programme for school. The importance of teachers’ perception of their leaders in success of a school has been documented in various researches. Researchers (such as Bhella, 1992) suggested that teachers’ morale is related to student achievement. And, in turn, principal has strongest influence on teachers’ satisfaction in workplace. (Vanderstoepe et al, 1994) From that perspective, teachers’ satisfaction and perceptions of principal in leading change process would directly have an impact on success rate of new programme of boosting students’ achievement.

In process of writing, author discussed with many teachers on what they expect their leaders to do when introducing a new programs to their schools. The author has summarized teachers’ opinions for inclusion in this paper. Previous research and literature would be used to illuminate factors that are critical to success of a principal in leading a change programs. To further enhance clarity of exposition, I have presented systematically ideas encapsulated in previous research by using acronym of L.E.A.D.E.R as a model to elucidate steps in leading a successful change programs in a school. The acronym of L.E.A.D.E.R stands for:

Leading by example

Empowering vision

Adaptive change

Developing people

Evaluating system

Recharge

The above model does not try to be prescriptive or attempt to imply that it will cover all salient factors of an effective change programme. Due to prescribed length of paper, author hopes that model will shed more light in topic of research in a more methodical manner.

Leading by Example

In most organisations that have embarked on a change programme, one of more common complaints by employees is that leader does not ‘walk talk’. In a school, if a principal is not willing to learn and adapt to changes, there are no compelling reasons for staff to do so. The Scout’s motto, ‘ Lead by Example’, is a major criteria of what a principal must do to succeed in leading change.

In order to create a thinking and learning organisation, principal will become researchers and designers rather than controllers and overseers. They should also be a model of learning to rest of organisation and encourage staff to be life-long learners. (Senge, 1990) More importantly, a principal must not merely communicate in words, but by deeds to convince staff that change is happening at all levels. These build a sense of esprit de corp in school that will help in lessening pressures that change brings to organisations.

In short, a principal has to be perceived to be capable in leading school educational development by his or her own example. (Dunning, 1993; McHugh & McMullan, 1995) Unless staffs are convinced, they will not work co-operatively towards success of change programme.

Empowering Vision

A change programme requires a change of vision. According to Kotter (1995, p.10),

“ A vision says something that clarifies direction in which an organisation needs to move.”

The Ministry of Education developed vision of TSLN in middle of 1997. In schools, banners are put up to herald vision of TSLN and school principals were expected to align teachers towards this shared vision for betterment of schools. The principals are expected to modify culture through skill in communication of necessary shared values for a changed vision. (Campbell-Evans, 1993).

Adaptive Change