Leadership: what’s the deal with the addiction to toxicity?

Iain Henderson, Director of The Bridge

I have been privileged to experience some wonderful examples of leadership, both directly and indirectly, but interestingly, all the worst leaders I have seen have been men.

Or they have been women trying to exhibit the same sort of (perceived) male attributes.

There. I’ve said it.

(This piece only focuses on gender balance in leadership. I’ve not knowingly observed at close enough hand someone non-binary who has been terrible as a leader, so I’d appreciate if we can stick with this distinction for the moment.  There has been, quite rightly, plenty of deep examination of the lack of diversity which makes leadership so unrepresentative both of society and specifically of the education sector.  Omitting discussion of other aspects of diversity should not be taken to mean that they are not important.  Quite the opposite).

I don’t, of course, mean that all men are terrible leaders.  Hear me out.

Despite efforts, there are clearly still far too few women in significant positions of leadership, both in education and in wider society. Many laudable initiatives to redress that balance of representation exist. Shane Mann and I, as co-directors of the Festival of Education, have been privileged to partner with numerous brilliant organisations to bring amazing content to the festival agenda.  Among these has been WomenEd, whose leaders have provided exceptional inspiration and expertise, which is hopefully bringing positive benefit to the leadership balance in the education sector.

But I think that we are also missing part of the point here.

Much research exists which consistently identifies the sort of qualities that make leaders excellent in their field. These qualities also seem relatively transferable across different domains. In various pieces of research referred to below, the following emerge from many studies as strongly associated with positive leadership behaviours:

·         authenticity

·         collaboration

·         compassion

·         creativity

·         comfort with ambiguity

·         curiosity about others

·         emotional intelligence

·         cultural intelligence

·         empathy

·         resilience

·         adaptability

·         lack of ego

·         humility

·         nuanced

·         awareness of bias

·         self-awareness (I like to add in “non-delusional” to this)

In addition,

·         to view leadership as service to those in your organisation

·         to see your role as leader to grow the capability of those around you, and

·         to believe in their capacity for that growth

·         to create psychological safety

·         to trust, value and call upon the expertise of team members or direct reports

are all attributes of long-lasting successful leaders.

These qualities are often correlated with being female, although this is neither a universal nor causal link.

Some of the evidence is here:

Görgens-Ekermans & Roux (2021) found empirical evidence supporting the notion that emotional intelligence and transformational leadership are related. Seghal (2023) refers to four beneficial components of emotional intelligence in leadership: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship management. Gómez-Leal, Holzer, Bradley, Fernández-Berrocal & Patti  (2021) also report on the relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership in school leaders. Bourke and Titus (2019) found 6 traits of inclusive leaders. Fullan (2021) writes about leading with nuance. Jian (2022) studies empathy in leadership. Andrin, Kilag, Groenewald, Unabia, Cordova, & Nacario (2023) look at the shift from management to transformative leadership. Taylor and Lambert (2022) cite the need for empathy in school leadership. Mineo (2024) writes about the conflict between being able to relate well to others, and the need to be analytical. . Granville-Chapman, Lee and Ritchie-Dunham (2024) highlight the need for a focus on flourishing. In their acclaimed book, Bidston and Granville-Chapman (2020) summarise excellent leadership in three core principles: to know, love and inspire your people.

These are recent pieces of research, but we have known about the impact of these qualities for very much longer.  However, despite the weight of this evidence and much more, so-called “Alpha” leaders exhibiting:

·         decisiveness

·         self-confidence

·         assertiveness

·         charisma

·         dominance

·         dynamism

·         apparent extroversion (many introverts can put on an act when they think they need to)

·         willingness to take risks

·         networking

are often those who seem to come out on top in those leadership contests.

Why does the education sector not pay more attention to what we know to be true?

Governing bodies, Trustees and CEOs often seem drawn to appoint this sort of person. They effect short-term change, which seems outwardly to be progress, either in outcomes or financial performance. The same governing body can congratulate itself at its own brilliance for appointing such a dynamic leader, but when they leave, usually it seems between 2-4 years later in educational institutions, David B Hawley writes here about the short length of tenure for international school heads), human damage is left behind, and the next alpha leader comes in to start the cycle again.

It is no wonder that the education profession has a crisis of retention – leading to a related recruitment problem. When teachers leave the profession early – not for retirement but to get out, and almost 40000 in the UK did this in each of 2023 and 2024 – reasons cited are consistent, and include directly leadership-related issues:

·         accountability structures

·         school leadership

·         lack of support

·         lack of autonomy and agency

·         workload

·         stress

·         mental health and burnout

·         student behaviour

Other issues also emerge that leaders can’t do quite as much about directly, such as pay, and career advancement opportunities, but the overwhelming majority of reasons are related to teachers’ experiences of the impact of leadership.

So, why doesn’t the sector appoint more leaders with the qualities that we know make a positive difference?

(Which would, as an inevitable consequence, mean that more women would be appointed to those leadership positions).

What are your thoughts? Share yours via the thread on LinkedIn.

Iain Henderson is Director of The Bridge at Wellington College and Co-Director of the Festivals of Education. Until recently, he was Deputy Head (Educational Developments and Partnerships). He has taught in both state and independent sectors in the UK. He has been a Biology teacher; a Head of Year; a Boarding Housemaster; Assistant Head, and Deputy Head. He set up the golf programme at Wellington and built an enviable reputation as the leading school in the UK.

He has worked with all of the schools in the Wellington Family to embed the essential Wellington DNA, ethos or culture, sensitively in each new context. Along with Shane Mann of EducationScape (formerly Lsect), he has developed the original concept of the Festival of Education at Wellington to be one of the most important events on the education calendar. He has also overseen Educational Conferences, the Wellington College Learning Alliance and the Wheeler Programme, as well as any other partnership or collaborative work undertaken by the school. He is a trained coach and has introduced and grown a coaching culture at Wellington. He has now trained over 500 teachers there and at other schools to become coaches. He is also a governor of Wellington College International School Bangkok and until recently, a trustee at Corvus Multi-Academy Trust.