|
Some administrators may find this difficult to live with at first, but it is almost impossible to run a fair, nonmanipulative meeting when you have a personal investment in the outcome. There is no way principals, for example, can objectively lead a group of teachers as they consider discontinuing a principal's pet project. Administrators will give away their position with their body language: eyes that will light up when someone says something reinforcing, or a shrug when someone openly disagrees. It is also easy to use the leadership role as a way of "keeping the floor" and doing all the talking.... resulting in a rubber stamp meeting. Reseach shows that when managers run their own meetings they often talke 60% of the time! Hardly the collaborative model of decision making. In addition, the big trouble is that the principal attempts to play too many roles (facilitator, recorder, expert, timekeeper, coach, agenda designer, etc.) at one time. We strongly recommend that principals and other administrators not run their own meetings. You have much to lose and nothing to gain. Or, as Stephen Covey says, when we give up power we can extend our influence. Faculty members will be honored, and will certainly have more ownership in the outcomes, if they have meaningful roles to play in the meeting. And the role of facilitator is the most meaningful, yet often the most difficult to give up. Remember, the administrator retains some key roles: he/she
is usually the convenor, and sometimes the expert. So why not give
up facillitator, recorder and timekeeper?
|