Supporting a New Head: The Chair of Governors’ Role

The arrival of a new Head is an exciting moment, full of opportunity but edged with nervous anticipation as the school awaits the first communications and decisions. Chair and Head alike feel that tension, however experienced they are.

Every context and every personality is different. As an incoming Head for the first time, my Chair — once mistaken for Princess Anne when she opened a new sports centre — arrived at our first meeting in motorcycle leathers, helmet in hand, and left by giving me a tour of her Harley. I was not expecting that. The Chair at my second school was long established and far more conventional.

They were different personalities, but both were skilled, clear and articulate, with a shared commitment to the school, its culture and direction — and to helping me lead well. They were interested in me, understood that my flourishing mattered to the school, and gave both support and clarity of expectation. They were a sounding board for testing and challenging ideas, while respecting my autonomy. Looking back, that relationship was central to anything we might claim to have achieved together.

Appointing the Head is often cited as the most important act of a Chair. It isn’t. It is the appointment plus the careful management of the transition and the building of a working relationship. This requires forethought, time and structure and this article suggests some principles and ideas to ensure the transition is successful.

 

New realities and principles for success

Schools in all sectors now need to adapt rapidly to changing circumstances, so the luxury of an evenly paced transition is not always possible or desirable. Since appointments are often made at least two terms in advance, a governing body that delays important decisions “to see what the new Head thinks” may already be too late.

Most schools can no longer equate strategy solely with school improvement, culture and ethos, however vital those remain. Commercial pressures, possible mergers or acquisitions, international expansion, income diversification and urgent cost management require boards to be adaptable, futures-minded and dynamic.

This constantly changing reality stretches the skills required beyond the professional experience of an educator alone. A successful recruitment process will have tested the competencies of its new leader, but governing bodies and heads need to see themselves as co-leading the school through complementary knowledge and skills– without governors stepping into the management space.  The demands on the Head’s time have also changed, placing even greater emphasis on the structure, roles and responsibilities of the leadership team. The transition period and the setting of expectations must reflect this broader perspective.

Good governance principles matter more than tick box action plans or timelines. From the moment of appointment, two-way trust and transparency of communication is vital, especially if difficult conversations are required. This will set the tone of the relationship. Whatever a Head’s experience, they should not be surprised by what they find on day one. Sadly, this is happening too often.

Roles and responsibilities should be clearly defined and maintained: the Chair governs and the Head leads or authority is undermined. Similarly, it is important that the Chair ensures that the governing body is aligned and their messages are consistent so that the leadership knows exactly where it stands.

Consistently clear expectations and objectives, reviewed together help sustain momentum, develop confidence and build trust. This is not supervision or micromanagement; it is support and challenge. The Head and the Chair should be accessible to each other with regular meetings scheduled whilst avoiding being intrusive. The Head and their family need downtime together – do you really need to touch base every Monday at 10am even in the holidays?

Ultimately, professional friendship depends on empathy and understanding. Whatever the strategic complexities, Heads will appreciate “How are you?” and “How are the family?” as an opening gambit.

 

Laying Foundations

Transition begins at appointment, not on the start date. Yet the spirit of “the old has gone, the new is here!” can create difficulties for both outgoing and incoming leaders. Allow the “old” to leave well. They may be moving to fresh pastures and managing transitions in both directions, or retiring after years of service. Chairs should continue to nurture that relationship. An outgoing Head knows they are old news; they would rather not feel like it

Remember the ‘new’, especially if they are already a Head, is not yet employed by you and will need to remain immersed in the needs of their own school. Following discussion with the new Head’s Chair of Governors, or Head if they are a deputy, a Chair should be crystal clear and flexible around expectations of visits and preparation work before arrival. This conversation needs to remain open-ended as the current school will be managing its own appointment process.

The following questions are intended to to help Chairs formulate a plan and structure conversations from appointment to start date.

• How are you ensuring the Head understands the school’s strategic priorities, major risks, and cultural dynamics?
• Are you going to set any initial objectives for the Head? What are they? How will they be communicated and measured?
• How are you preparing the board for change? Have you discussed with the current head how they are preparing the school and leadership team for change?
• Is the governance framework sufficiently clear? Does it outline and delineate roles, responsibilities and decision-making parameters? Has the board got the right balance of skills to support the new Head?

• Headwinds mean schools rarely have long periods for strategic development during a Head’s transition. Have you discussed with the Head, board and executive whether data or surveys should be collected in advance to inform decisions and deepen understanding?

• Have you provided insight into the workings and personalities of the board? Are there any unresolved issues or challenging stakeholder relationships of which the new head needs to be aware?

• Are there induction meetings to co-ordinate, especially with board members and external stakeholders? How will they be facilitated?
• Some schools have less flexible budgets than others. Is there a need to enable discussions with finance leaders and governors about any strategic finance and budgeting changes or contingencies for the first year?
• Have you discussed the professional and personal needs of the Head? Would a coach or a mentor outside the school be a helpful addition?

Both the incoming and departing Heads will often have families who might feel unsettled. Discussions around moving arrangements are often sensitive and should not be left to chance.

 

The ‘first hundred days’

The ‘first hundred days’ is the traditional measure by which the US President sets the tone and communicates the policy agenda. For a new Head, it is an essential time to build leadership credibility. My first bursar gave me Michael Watkins’ ‘The First 90 days’ as a welcome present and one principle stuck because it was about people more than strategy and KPIs: ‘find the historians’ – those within the community who have organisational longevity and knowledge. Whilst a new Head develops their narrative and identifies change priorities, this first phase is chiefly about relationships, listening, learning about the school’s culture, understanding its strengths and challenges and getting to know the team.

During this period, the Chair should schedule regular meetings that offer support and probing questions, help the Head test their thinking and encourage well-timed decisions, without stepping across the boundary into operational management.

 

Setting direction, enabling change

At some point, listening and learning needs to shift gear towards action, as the Head begins to gain a clearer vision of what is required and the capabilities of the various teams which will enable delivery. Alignment with the board will be crucial. The Chair needs to communicate the board’s priorities and ideas clearly to the Head, while remaining open to the fresh perspective of the person appointed for that purpose. Beware the alumni who want to keep the school as it was! Equally, the Chair must ensure that neither they nor the Head stores up surprise-change bombs for the first meetings. A unified and consistent position is crucial, and this cannot be achieved without regular conversation.

It is wise to work alongside the Head to identify timelines for change. Working towards a published development plan that is scrutinised and finalised in line with governing body meetings maintains listening and momentum and keeps the school looking forward. It also provides a basis for continuous development and embedding change. Bear in mind that school terms and timetables make the timing of implementation more of a challenge.

The Head will quite quickly make a judgement about the capability and structure of their teams, their executive assistant etc. and who best enables them to do the job and deliver change. Leadership teams might need investment in their professional development. Sometimes re-structuring is required, which will be sensitive. The Head needs the Chair to present a consistent line to the board and the wider community.

Reviewing Progress

The Head and Chair need to develop a spirit of honest self-reflection whenever they meet. Meetings should be positive and realistic without too much backslapping, naval gazing or hairshirt wearing. What is working well? What has not worked so well? How is the leadership team functioning? Are there any areas that need adjustment? Is the governance providing the necessary support without overstepping into operational matters?

The Chair might usefully ask themselves or invite the opinion of the Head: am I micromanaging? Are my expectations realistic or am I overloading the Head? Have I got the balance between support and challenge right – too much ‘critical’ or too much ‘friendship’? Are messages consistent?

If there are matters to address with the Head, saving them for formal appraisal or review is bad governance. Likewise, surprising the Chair or governing body with a problem, or a crisis already well developed, is poor leadership.

Ideally clear objectives will have been set early in the tenure, if not prior to the start date. Mid-year it is worth checking progress against them more formally and realigning if necessary. This is not a verdict but a signpost on the journey to reassure governors and sustain momentum before the final annual review. The school will no doubt have its own review process, usually linked to remuneration decisions, which will of course celebrate successes and identify areas for improvement and professional or personal development needs. Nonetheless, the end of the first year is a particular milestone. Commenting publicly and internally on achievements will strengthen confidence and set the tone for the community.

Although the new Head will be a primary focus, review practice should also consider the effectiveness of the whole leadership team and governing body, and how well they are working together to move the school forward. If something is not working, the issues are rarely the Head’s responsibility alone. If things have gone well, it is usually a team effort, and the team should be recognised.

 

Stewarding into the future

Like sprinters in a relay, the changeover determines the outcome. The run into the box must be sure-footed and the baton handed over smoothly so the new sprinter can quickly lengthen their stride. Heads steward the school baton until it is time to welcome the next runner. They need the Chair – the coach on the side – to ensure they run well. Get the transition right and it creates a lasting impact for the entire school community. Quite a challenge; quite a privilege.