​
​
Educational Leadership Administrative Platform
​
My administrative platform is supported by five pillars: decision-making, culture, trust, the educative mission, and continuous improvement. These pillars are grounded in my understanding of the theories of educational leadership and anchored by my experience in educational organizations.
​
First, I believe that good leaders understand that decision-making is both a science and an art. While many educational leaders believe that the rigorous application of logic, rationality, and science is the key to effective decision-making, educational leaders frequently confront a great deal of ambiguity and uncertainty in their world, to the extent that assumptions on the role of logic and rationality in decision making are being reexamined by researchers (Owens and Valesky, 2011, p. 231). Arthur Bloomberg described decision-making as a craft, where leaders use “an almost intuitive sense of process” (Owens and Valesky, 2011, p. 117). Logical and intuitive decision-making approaches do not have to be mutually-exclusive or competing strategies. Leaders should be able to call upon both approaches, even simultaneously, if necessary. In reality, leaders can often arrive at a decision through an “Ah-ha!” experience, where the “human talent of insight” (William C. Golden, 2012) is used to understand the issue at hand and arrive at creative solutions. While each leader may have a clear preference in his decision-making approach based on experience, training, or personality, the effective leader will recognize that pragmatic uses of data and information can be augmented effectively through the leaders “nose for things” (Owens and Valesky, 2011, p. 117).
​
I believe that good leaders strive to understand the culture of their organization. According to Owens and Valesky (2011), traditions and rituals can create an organizational culture that “exerts great power in establishing and maintaining the behavior norms that characterize the place-even more powerfully than rules and regulations can.” (p. 144). In describing the trials and tribulations that Derek Bok, the former President of Harvard University experienced while trying to implement changes at the school, Christensen and Eyring (2011) described the Harvard culture of having a certain “DNA” that created the “genetic constraints” to change (p. 180). This can be particularly true of older schools, where the culture “develops strength and refinement with the passage of time” (Owens and Valseky, 2011, p. 55). Once leaders understand the organizational culture, they have a better chance of tapping into it to gain support for their vision.
​
Further, I believe that trusting organizations perform better. In “Reinventing Leadership (1995), Bennis and Townsend state that institutions are “human communities” and that “trust is the emotional glue of all institutions” (p. 63). According to Owens and Valesky (2011), a climate of trust can enhance the commitment of members to organizational goals and serve as a source of renewal within organization (p. 220). Trust is inexorably intertwined into the psyche of the individuals within an organization, both positive and negative. If organizations are just a concept in our minds, then trust is the currency on which the organization trades. It makes the members of the organization feel that their participation is meaningful and worthwhile. It gives them confidence, assurance, and hope. As a leader, I have tried to hold myself to a high standard honesty, integrity, supportiveness, and competence. I hope that these behaviors have contributed, at least in some small measure, to my employees feeling that they have my trust, and I have theirs.
​
I believe in the educative mission. There is tremendous pressure for educational institutions to operate like businesses, which is odd since in many cases, they already do. Florida Gulf Coast University for example, operates within a balanced budget and is one of the most cost efficient universities in its peer category. The problem is that the primary motive of any for-profit enterprise is to increase shareholder profit. However, the educative mission is to “foster the learning, personal growth, and development of all participants” (Owens and Valesky, 2011, p. 13). It is worth doing because it makes people capable of doing more with their lives. As people should have the opportunity for continuous improvement, the educational enterprise should strive for that as well. I have been trained in the concepts of Total Quality Management and have seen how a commitment to continuous improvement can transform an organization. Simsek and Louis state that the characteristic of loose coupling in the educative organization system makes large-scale, dramatic change less likely (1994, p. 670). Even so, incremental change and improvement are critical to the success and vitality of the school.
Finally, I believe in the importance of investing in the continuous personal growth and development of my employees. At a university, employees “are often the most valuable resources available to create and maintain a high-performing organization” (Owens and Valesky, 2011, p. 126). From a purely economic perspective, it makes sense to develop employees since it will enhance their performance and productivity, providing a return on the investment. But is should be done because it is the right thing to do. Universities are educative institutions; therefore, according to Owens and Valesky (2011), they should foster the growth and development of all participants, not just students (p.13). I believe that leaders need to be committed to their own improvement. I have been a leader for the past twenty years of my professional career, and I am still learning about myself every day. It is humbling to realize that after two decades, I am still a work in progress. After all, As Owens and Valesky (2011) state, “Leadership is a never-ending process of growth and development” (p.220). Bennis 02003, p. 29) believes that the capacity to develop leadership skills begins with self-reflection. The process of writing this administrative platform was an excellent opportunity to stop and reflect, and then formalize my beliefs on leadership.
References
Bennis, W. & Goldmsith, J. (2003). Learning to lead: A workbook on becoming a leader. New York, NY: Basic Books.
​
Bennis, W. & Townsend, R. (1995). Reinventing leadership: Strategies to empower the organization. New York, NY: William Morrow and Company, Inc.
​
Christensen, C. & Eyring, H. (2011). The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
​
Owens, R. G. & Valesky, T. C. (2011). Organizational behavior in education: Leadership and school reform (10th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.
​
Simsek, H. & Louis, K.S. (1994). Organizational change as paradigm shift: Analysis of the change process in a large, public university. The Journal of Higher Education, 65(6), 670-695.
​
William Cecil Golden School Leadership Development Program. Decision Making Strategies (2012). Retrived from https://www.floridaschoolleaders.org.