“We never see board members. We don’t even know who they are. They make huge decisions that affect us all, but they never engage with us. They are invisible”.
That is an amalgam of comments I have often heard from teachers and other staff in many schools I have worked with (indeed, far too many!).
I also often hear comments from teachers and staff along opposite lines: “The board needs to keep its grubby hands out of our work. They interfere too much. Can’t they just leave us alone and let us do our work?”.
It is clear that staff in schools, and some board members, may not be clear on the appropriate boundaries between the board and the school’s employees. Clearly, many school boards fail to get the balance right.
In order to understand the “right” balance, it is important to understand the board’s role with respect to the Principal (Head of School). The essence of that relationship is that the Board has only one employee, and that is the Principal. This doesn’t mean the Principal is paid from the bank account of a separate legal entity than everyone else who works at the school. It does mean, however, that the Principal has a unique relationship with the Board that is not shared with anyone else working at the school.
The Principal serves as CEO (Chief Executive Officer) of the School and, as such, will have delegated authority from the Board to manage all day-to-day operations of the School. In return, the Principal is uniquely accountable to the board for the effectiveness of all the day-to-day operations in the school, including executing the general policies and directives of the Board, supervising and controlling all of the operational and educational affairs of the School, and so on. This is the “accountability-responsibility relationship” between governance (the board’s work) and management (the Principal’s work) shown in the diagram below. The Board delegates day-to-day operations and implementation of the school’s Mission to the Principal, and in return, the Principal is accountable to the Board for the effective implementation of the Mission through the day-to-day operations.
The Principal’s duties will include, but not be limited to, speaking on behalf of the School, recruiting and supervising teachers, planning and implementation of school curriculum and student admission standards, overseeing general supervision of students, financial matters, building and grounds, fundraising, and acting as a liaison with the staff, administrative and parent bodies. Being accountable to the Board, the Principal will attend Board meetings, prepare and transmit timely reports to the Board, work with the Board to set the strategic plan and mission for the School, and will monitor the School’s overall performance and development.
Every teacher and member of the non-teaching staff is employed by the Principal, and is thus accountable to the Principal. Only the Principal is employed by the Board, and only the Principal is directly accountable to the Board.
This accountability-responsibility relationship is essential to the effective working of any school that aims to implement the board’s strategic vision in everyday practice. Unfortunately, it is also the rationale for board members in some schools to think they should never associate with the staff on the grounds that doing so might short-circuit or blur the clear line of accountability from the Board through the Principal to the staff.
In everyday practice, it is usually helpful for Board member to get to know members of the staffs – not to hear their complaints or to be lobbied behind the Principal’s back, but to establish a two-way relationship of trust and respect. Establishing a clear, open, accessible line of communication is especially important so it is available in the rare but serious event that a formal complaint needs to be made about the Principal to the Board.
It follows from this that board members should be seen around the school and at school events such as sports matches or musical performances, but not too often, and never in a way that undermines the Principal’s role as the primary line of two-way communication between the Board and the staff.
Apart from extremely rare events such as discovery of financial mismanagement, a crisis, or a lack of confidence in the Principal, the Board should never normally be involved in day-to-day management of school operations. Leaving aside these types of circumstances, is it possible for the board to swing the pendulum too far to the other end of the spectrum and become too removed? Undoubtedly this can happen. If all information is channelled solely through the Principal without any triangulation or checking on the Board’s part, the Principal’s authority may become dangerously unrestrained, and it can even disconnect the board from the culture of the school, its staff, students, parents and the wider community.
How can the Board ensure it is getting the balance right and receiving honest, fair and balanced reports from the Principal? Perhaps the most constructive way is to conduct an independent annual performance review of the Principal that seeks input from the Principal’s direct reports, other teaching and non-teaching staff, students and parents, and includes questions pertaining to school culture, morale, academic performance, and so on.
One highly effective way for board members to engage with staff is through board committees. Board committees can be thought of as the Board’s workforce. Committees report to the Board and make recommendations, but they generally do not have the power to make decisions – this authority should always rest with the Board. Although typically chaired by a board member, board committees may include members of the staff and even parents or members of the community with particular expertise or skills. For example, the Finance Committee would normally include the School’s Bursar (Chief Finance Officer) and the Building and Grounds Committee would usually include the Chief Operating Officer and/or the Property Manager. As the Principal is always an ex officio member of every board committee, the committee structure can offer a well-structured, appropriate formal channel for board-staff interactions.
Another effective way for the board to engage with staff is through regular written communications in the area of governance. For example, in my role as Chair of the Board of a school for Indigenous students in Queensland (Australia), I write a summary of the Board’s relevant discussions and decisions after every board meeting for the Staff Bulletin. The Staff Bulletin is prepared and distributed by the Executive Principal (who also attends the board meetings), and so no short-circuiting of proper and appropriate occurs as staff are embraced as trusted, well-informed members of the decision-making process.
At a less formal level, when staff see board members walking around the school or at a school musical production or sports match, how should they interact? Quite often, both the board member and the staff member will be equally nervous and similarly aware of the need to behave within acceptable boundaries. But where do those boundaries lie?
Is it appropriate for a board member to give instructions directly to a member of the staff? No.
Is it necessary for a staff member to accept instructions from a board member? Also no.
Is it appropriate for a staff member to take aside a board member to complain about something they don’t like or a decision the Principal has made? No, because operational issues are not within board members’ responsibilities. The Principal is responsible for all management issues and supervising the staff, so when a staff member approaches a board member with a management complaint, it is important for the board member to react properly. In general, the board member should simply encourage the staff member to meet and discuss the concerns with his or her line supervisor or the Principal, reiterating that Principal is responsible for overall management and is therefore the person who can address the concern. No board member should ever act as a court of appeal against a decision the Principal has made that upsets a staff member.
The only exception to this general rule would be if a serious complaint about the Principal’s conduct, ethics or honesty were to be made. In such cases, the verbal or conversational complaint should not be entertained by the board member, but the staff member bringing the complaint should be encouraged to document the concern and forward it to the Board Chair as a matter of urgency. It is important that every school has an established grievance policy and a complaints mechanism (such as a well-publicised e-mail address with direct access to the Board Chair) to handle such rare but serious situations.
In the dynamic world of education, the relationship between teachers and school board members is a two-way balancing act of professionalism, collaboration, and mutual respect. Contacts should not be artificially avoided, but approached with clear communication, ethical boundaries, and of course a shared commitment to building the best possible futures for the student. Board members and school staff are on the same team, but they serve in different roles. When everyone ensures that conversations are constructive, respectful, and student-centred, educators and board members can turn even the most awkward discussions into opportunities for growth. After all, good schools are never built on conflict – they are built on co-operation and teamwork.
- Dr Stephen Codrington
We offer support for school leaders and board members in many areas, including workshops on the Board’s duties, and Head of School (Principal) appraisals.
Further information on this and many other facets of best practice in school leadership and governance is provided in the books “Optimal School Governance", and “Insights into School Leadership and Board Governance”, which can be ordered directly through Pronins.
You may also be interested in previous articles which are archived at https://optimalschool.com/articles.html. You can subscribe to receive future articles by e-mail using the red button below.
