How to cope with resistance and conflict when implementing innovative ideas in education?
Dall-E generated image about friction to innovation in education worldwide

How to cope with resistance and conflict when implementing innovative ideas in education?

Here is my full advice that I gave to "How do you cope with resistance and conflict when implementing innovative ideas in education?"

Sources of resistance and conflict

Innovation is by definition different from the status quo. Thus, it will tend to conflict with current standards, such as regulations and national/international frameworks. This is a huge challenge to true innovation.

Another major challenge, is the fact that what we learn as children is much harder for us to change as adults. For instance, brands that we liked as a child will stick with us much more than ones advertised to us as adults.

In the case of education, this means that it is hard for us to even see past current paradigms, such as "grade levels", which are modeled on assembly lines from the industrial revolution. Thus, just opening people's eyes to the possibility that there is a different way to view the world is critical.

Leadership styles and innovation

During the process of innovation, different leadership styles are needed at different times and in different combinations. But the following pattern often emerges:

  1. Authoritarian Leadership: To get things started
  2. Transformational Leadership: To inspire people
  3. Servant Leadership: To support the next stage
  4. Democratic Leadership: To go on into the future

Authoritarian leadership

While authoritarian leadership is often instantly disregarded as "bad", we must consider the fact that Steve Jobs used an authoritarian leadership style, that kept consistency and vision to Apple's products. Some have even argued that leaders like MLK or Gandhi, were authoritarian leaders, although I would put them more in the category of servant leaders.

But leadership style, like most things, is not all or nothing. There is great value to being "authoritarian" when it comes to ensuring the vision and principles of the organization are front and center.

But for other aspects of leadership, authoritarianism will likely ultimately lead to failure.

Transformational leadership

On the path of having true innovation, transformational leadership should generally follow authoritarian leadership. This is because, it is critical for an organization to not do things because "I said" but because it is the right thing to do, and people are inspired to do it.

Also, as with all leadership styles, it is not an all or nothing. An authoritarian leader will only be successful in "laying down the law" about how to do things, if people recognize that this "law" is right. That requires inspiring people.

Servant leadership

While servant leadership is critical after Transformational Leadership, it is important from the start for people to know that the leader is making decisions to support the organization. This is especially true if the leader is using an authoritarian style.

Servant leadership comes most into its own, right before democratic leadership, as the next generation of leaders and the participants need the support and mentorship of the servant leader to become an organization that will last and continue the original vision.

Frances Hesselbein is a great example of a servant leader. Peter Drucker, father of modern management, said she was the best leader in America. Yet, is often unknown because she was such a servant leader, and not a self-promoter.

Democratic leadership

Democratic leadership usually needs to be the end point of innovation. Once there is an organizational culture in place supporting the innovation, and also effective practices in place, then it is time to bring more power to all involved.

But, this doesn't mean that no power was given before. It is just how the power was divided was not a full "one participant, one vote" system.... And in fact, in most organizations, it never reaches this point.

There are also challenges to democracies. Politics usually come into play, and we must remember that it was a democracy that killed Socrates. So, while we may inherently say democratic leadership is best, it too can have issues.

Here’s what else to consider

As Clayton Christensen demonstrated in his great work on disruptive innovation, it is very difficult for existing systems to be disrupters. While he was writing about businesses, the same is even more true in education. Public education is the hardest to change, but even private educational institutions don't have much incentive to massively change, when they have developed so much of their systems for the current status quo.

Leaders who try to change existing systems, will usually be frustrated. This is why it is often better to start a new institution if you want real innovation. But this of course is MUCH harder logistically, even if it is easier for innovation.


要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了