Effecting Change

Montessori Life, Summer 2004 by Bassett, Patrick F

Change comes to the universe of schools slowly, if at all, and only after perturbations that rock the firmament. Leaders come to schools, almost inevitably, as change agents: Often they are hired precisely to effect the changes that were needed but impossible to embrace under the old regime. New leaders have only a short time to establish their own leadership credibility and trust, to develop some political capital (all of which and more will be expended on the first major change), and to guide the change process to success.

It is the unusual leader who does so continuously, over time: Too often the changes come at such high costs that change agent leadcrscithcrleaveaftcrashorttimeorthcmselves shift roles to become co-conspirators of preserving the status quo, since they, eventually, become the embodiment of the status quo. Long-term leaders, on the other hand, can be a school's greatest resource precisely because the credibility is deep, their stock valued, and hence the opportunities for risk-taking (a prerequisite for change) more available and less dangerous to the health of the leader himself or herself.

The literature on change, from many scholarly sources (Bridges, 1980; KublcrRoss, 1969; Lcwin, 1975; Peters & Waterman, 1984; Satir, 1991), posits seven predictable stages of change that leaders could and should anticipate and prepare for, including the following:

* Business as Usual: the routine; the "frozen" state; the status quo.

* External Threat: potential disaster; propitious change event; an ending; a "death in the family"; an "unfreezing" via the introduction of the foreign clement; disequilibrium; dissatisfaction with the status quo.

* Denial: refusal to read the Richter scale; anger and rage; chaos.

* Mourning: confusion; depression.

* Acceptance: letting go.

* Renewal: creativity; the incubation state of new ideas and epiphanies; new beginnings; movement; vision of what "better" might look like; reintegration; first practical steps; practice of new routines.

* New Structure: sustainablc change; the new status quo; new "frozen" state of restored equilibrium; spiritual integration; internalization and transformation of self.

For lasting and meaningful change, the simple equation of change is D V F S S >R: For any change to be permanent, one must have: Dissatisfaction with the status quo Vision of a better way First practical steps Structure built for lasting effect Spirit that helps people to internalize the change...must be > Resistance to change (Grace, Hughes, & Turncr, 1997).Without all of the left side of the equation, regression occurs, and innovations are effete.

Herein "lies the rub": In schools, resistance to change is so formidable that leaders sense the left side of the equation needs to be monumental in scope and seriousness for any chemical reactions to percolate. Ironically, there is consensus, even among that most conservative of populations-school faculties-that for children to succeed in the 21s' century (and thus for the civilization to prosper), our schools must change and do so rather dramatically. One must wonder, then, why schools are so much more change-averse and change-immune than other institutions in the culture (such as those Fortune 500 companies that have survived and prospered in the last 20 years by embracing change-as opposed to those which have disappeared by ignoring change). One could speculate that the elemental bases for the general human aversion to change are exaggerated within school populations:

* There must be visceral and biological roots for our aversion to change: literally, people feel sometimes nauseous, almost always threatened, by the introduction of change; fear almost inevitably produces the adrenaline response of "fight orflight." Witness, for example, the high anxiety level when a new principal or head of school enters the scene. It is the rare transition in school leadership that is not accompanied by some "fight" (active or passive-aggressive resistance to new initiatives) or "flight" (departures from the school). Institutional leaders and their boards should recognize and acknowledge that the level of fear is palpable upon the arrival of a new leader with a fresh vision and agenda and should therefore create mechanisms for trust and political capital to be built, quickly, before the change-agenda is introduced.

* There must be political roots for our aversion to change: Coretta Scott King speaks of transformational change leaders as those who "speak the truth to power," but of course those already in power see truth very differently from those who challenge the current power base. What is unique about schools is that power is diffused among several constituencies: the board, the administration, the faculty, and the parent body. So while the new head of school is the titular leader of an organization, "speaking the truth to power" in schools means confronting faculty (those who in fact are "in power" operationally) in terms of who they are and how they operate. Such confrontation is often seen as a serious challenge to a faculty's integrity, identity, and ego, and often perceived as personal and political attack. Leaders should recognize and acknowledge that what they may consider as requesting innocuous "procedural change" is often perceived as asking for a much deeper "identity change."