A Few Cautions On Site-Based Management

School Administrator, June, 1994 by Joseph Baim, Joseph C. Dimperio

Site-based management offers one of the most promising strategies for genuine school improvement and the staff commitment essential for success.

SBM is remarkably similar to Total Quality Management in its confidence that collegial problem-solving yields superior building-level decisions. Both approaches tap into the experience and intelligence of real-world experts: those affected by the decisions.

Site-based management practices are not without risk. But by anticipating the risks and viewing them as challenges rather than as reasons for skepticism, school leaders can preempt the risks and the discouragement that could lead to the abandonment of this initiative.

We offer these observations and cautionary notes from our own experiences with site-based management:

* Persuading Staff. Your staff needs to be convinced that everyone has a vested interest in contributing to good decisions. SBM cannot succeed if it becomes a spectator sport in which non-participants play "gotcha" when the players stumble.

* Relieving the Threats. Principals, charged as they are with accountability for building-level success, may feel threatened by site-based management because they fear losing the authority they believe they require for success. We believe principals lose nothing if they embrace SBM because it has the potential to enhance, not limit, their effectiveness.

* Tackling the Important. Problem-solving teams sometimes focus on issues that are perceived as trivial or inappropriate. While teams should not be directed from the top, they should be trained to use prioritization techniques to achieve maximum impact by aligning their activity with the strategic concerns of the school district. Teams also should know, up front, that contract issues are off-limits.

* Defining the Limits. Site-based management works most effectively when the parameters of team authority are honestly and forthrightly addressed and people develop firm relationships based on mutual respect and trust. Until the process is mature, avoid talking about "participative decision-making;" talk instead about "participative problem-solving."

* Watch Your Size. The size of groups should be limited. Our experience suggests that once the number of group members exceeds 10, you end up with a town meeting, not a problem-solving team.

* Understanding Consensus. The commitment of team members is critically important to success, but commitment alone is no substitute for effective problem-solving and consensus-building techniques. Consensus is tough to understand, difficult to achieve, and essential for success.

* Securing Top Support. Site-based management cannot succeed without the participation of the building principal. The principal must be a fully informed and enthusiastic participant and champion of the process.

* Broadening Participation. The definition of staff should not be limited to professionals. Every office and maintenance functionary is capable of adding value and should be viewed as a potential site-based team participant.

* Defining the Roles. Clearly articulate and define at the outset a mechanism for selecting team members, a succession plan, and a way of communicating with the entire building and district staff. Involve local union officials in this process and to make clear that while team members should be sensitive to the concerns of all staff constituencies, they are not functioning as staff representatives.

Achieving the promise of site-based management is not easy. It is a fragile structure and requires constant support and maintenance. Yet site-based management is essential if we are to successfully address the increasingly strident calls for educational reform.

Joseph Baim is president of Baim Associates, a consulting firm in Pittsburgh. Joseph Dimperio is superintendent of the West Mifflin, Pa., Area School District.