3 Understanding schools as

organisations
Understanding schools as organisations is a prerequisite for
effective leadership and management.

3.1 What is an organisation?

There are many different kinds of organisations, for
example:
• businesses
• charities
• sports clubs
• religious groups
• government departments
• schools.

All of these different organisations have certain features in

common.

Organisations are comprised of groups of people who work

together in different ways to meet shared goals.

From this we gather that organisations are structures that

have two clear aspects:
• a human dimension that refers to interpersonal relations
within the organisation
• a task dimension that refers to the task-related activities of
the people focusing on a common goal.

3.2 Schools as organisations

In most societies, schools are the most important
organisations that are geared towards young people.
Schools consist of . . .
• groups of people (educators, learners, principals, SMTs,
SGBs and parents)
• who work together in different ways (learning, teaching,
managing, leading, supporting)
• to meet shared goals (educating young people –
providing teaching and learning).

Understanding schools as organisations • 45


Most people
! would agree that
students learn more
than just the syllabus at
school. This is the
informal curriculum.
46 • Effective School Leadership and Management
3.2.1 What is the school’s purpose?
Good schools . . .
• are responsible for passing on knowledge, that is
important to society, to its young people
• pass on society’s values and social practices
• prepare people for the world of work
• play an important part in the intellectual, personal and
social development of young people
• are places of social activity, where people meet each
other, make friends, play together, fight, and so on.
Looking at schools as organisations helps us to understand
how they work, as well as the challenges for leading and
managing them. In the following section we will look at
features of organisational structure and then at features of
organisational culture.
Chief Superintendent of Education
(Management)
Superintendent of Education
(Management)
Principal and Deputies
Heads of
Department
Educators
Learners and Parents
3.3 How are organisations structured?
Put simply, an organisational structure is what people do
and how they relate to each other in the organisation.

There are two basic structures:

3.3.1 The most structured form of organisation is the Bureaucracy

bureaucracy

means ‘rule by
In bureaucracies, each person is appointed to an office or the office’.
position, which has clear tasks and which relates to other
offices according to fixed rules and procedures. Reporting
structures and lines of accountability and responsibility are
clearly set out. Work is done in uniform ways, no matter
who ‘holds the office’. Usually, government offices are run
as bureaucracies.
Organisations often have hierarchical structures, where
there are chains of command, and people are responsible to
those above them. At these institutions the higher your level
in the organisation, the higher your status is. Most
bureaucracies are hierarchical.
The structure of the organisation is usually shown as an
‘organogram’. This is a drawing that shows positions of
people and their jobs, and lines showing who reports to
whom. Look at the example on the previous page.

Understanding schools as organisations • 47

 3.3.2 Participation in organisations
Organisations may have flat structures, where there are
fewer layers of people, and broader job responsibilities.
Flatter structures allow for greater participation in decision-
making. Compare this example with the previous one.
Schools and education departments are often hierarchical
and bureaucratic. However, with the changes in legislation
and the introduction of new policies, the new approach to
school management is that schools should be flatter and
more open in their organisation.

3.4 What is organisational or school culture?

As well as structure, organisations also have their own
cultures. Put simply, the culture of an organisation can be
summed up as ‘the way things are done here’. Culture
refers to various aspects of life in the school:
• Different schools have ‘a different feel’. Each school has
its own culture.
• Culture tells us about what people do in their daily lives,
and how they make sense of what they do.
• Culture involves the things people take for granted, as
‘how things should be’. In an organisation like schools,
culture has to do with things like . . .
• the values, beliefs and attitudes of the educators,
learners and parents
• how educators and learners dress for school
• how people in the organisation speak to each other
• how quickly educators and learners go to class when
the bell rings
• what counts as ‘hard work’
• how people are expected to act when they are angry
or pleased.
• Rituals are an important part of school culture. In schools
there are important rituals that bring people together,
such as assemblies, ceremonies, school uniforms and
school songs. Other rituals keep people separate, such as
age groupings and groupings by gender. Rituals bring
meaning to organisations.

Culture and structure go together in an organisation, and

both must be addressed if an organisation is to be developed.

48 • Effective School Leadership and Management

3.5 Why should schools be analysed as
organisations?
We’ve seen that organisations have their own structures
(what work people do and how their jobs relate to each
other) and cultures (the ways they do things). Put simply,
the main task of managers and leaders is to be sure that the
organisation works well. In other words, they need to set
directions, and get people to work effectively and willingly
towards shared goals.
One way of trying to understand why schools succeed or
fail is to analyse them as organisations. Researchers in
South Africa have looked at schools where the culture of
learning and teaching has broken down. They have also
looked at schools that are coping well in very difficult
conditions. Without doubt, school organisation and culture
make a big difference.

3.6 Why have some schools broken down?

Researchers found the following features in the schools
where the culture of learning and teaching had broken
down:

Bad relationships
Relationships between educators, learners and school
management were often bad. They were caught up in bad
dynamics. Morale was low, and people did not seem to
have the will to improve things.

Confusion
There was confusion about roles and responsibilities.
Principals had often not earned the authority to lead the
schools. There were no procedures for dealing with
grievances.

Not focused on learning and teaching

These schools were no longer performing their ‘real work’
of teaching and learning. Educators, learners and
management had lost sight of why they were at school, and
their daily activities seemed to have lost educational
meaning.

Understanding schools as organisations • 49

 Blaming others
They often blamed each other and did not accept
responsibility for their failures.

It’s not my fault that the learners have

failed. They don’t have textbooks and
anyway they just refuse to learn.

3.7 What are the features of coping schools?

On the other hand, researchers found the following features
in schools that managed to cope well in spite of difficult
circumstances. While these schools were not free of
problems and often struggled to keep going, they had ways
of dealing with problems when they arose.

Focus on learning and teaching

There was a focus on teaching and learning. This was the
goal of the school. Meeting this goal gave staff and learners
a sense of purpose and motivation. All of these schools had
well-organised teaching and learning programmes.
Educators and learners spent most of their time working.

50 • Effective School Leadership and Management

Clear roles and responsibilities
In all of the coping schools, there were clear roles and
responsibilities. The schools worked along regular routines.
Lines of authority were clear. There was regular
communication. Staff and learners knew what was expected
of them. There were consistent disciplinary practices.
Lateness and absenteeism were not tolerated, and
attendance by staff and students was good.
In other words, the structure of the school worked to
support its purposes.

Culture of concern
People cared about each other. Principals listened to the
views of staff (though they didn’t always act on them!).
Every learner was known by name to at least some
educators. Educators were concerned about the well-being
of learners when they were not at school as well as when
they were at school.

Safety
Many of the coping schools operated in violent
surroundings. They had to deal with problems of gang
warfare, faction fighting, sexual abuse, and drunkenness.
Often, learners and educators suffered personal crises
because of these difficult surroundings.
Yet coping schools managed to stop problems from
spilling into them from outside and they kept the school
space safe. Many of the schools had fences and gates, and
these seemed to work even when they were not very strong.
People living around the school often helped schools to stay
safe.

Active leadership
All of the coping schools had active leadership. In some of
the schools, the principal was a strong and visionary leader.
In other schools, principals worked together with others in
management committees, and schools had ‘flatter’
management structures. In all cases, school principals had
procedures for communicating with staff and
consulting them.

Understanding schools as organisations • 51

 Sense of responsibility for themselves
One of the most important features of coping schools is that
they showed a sense of taking responsibility for themselves.
They were prepared to do what they could for themselves.
This didn’t mean that they could solve all their problems.
But they tried to solve the problems that they could and did
not have the attitude that ‘the Education Department’ or
someone else should do everything for them.

3.8 What can people reasonably expect from

their organisations?
Organisations bring people together to work towards
common goals. Working relationships should be based on
mutual expectations like: What do you expect of others?
And what do they expect of you? Every organisation needs
to base its working relationships on a set of core values.
These values are part of the organisation’s culture.

3.8.1 From their colleagues and their school people can

expect . . .
• mutual trust, confidence and reliability. Working
relationships build mutual trust. Everyone is confident
that the organisation values its staff, and that staff have
the necessary capability to perform their tasks. People
can be counted on to pull their weight.
• fairness and justice. People are treated fairly. Personal
effectiveness is recognised. There are opportunities for
individuals to appeal against injustice and unfair
treatment.
• openness, with freedom from fear. People are free to
express their true opinions within their working
relationships. There are opportunities for people to
participate in decision-making.
• expect recognition of the value of the individual. Each
person at each level is entitled to be treated with respect
and dignity.

52 • Effective School Leadership and Management

3.8.2 From its staff management can expect . . .
• integrity (to behave honestly)
• commitment (to express one’s full capability and energy
in one’s work)
• reliability (to be counted on consistently to do what is
expected of one)
• initiative (to originate new ideas without being asked)
• co-operation (to work together with others for the
common purpose)
• constructive criticism (to engage with problems with a
view to solving them).

3.8.3 Staff can expect of their management . . .

• clear accountability and lines of authority
• competent managers and leaders
• opportunities to participate in decision-making
• challenging work (opportunities to use individual working
capacity to the fullest)
• timely and constructive feedback on performance
• fair payment for different levels of work
• assurance of continued employment (so long as there is
no redundancy, and the individual continues to do the
work)
• being adequately advised of opportunities for
advancement, and given the opportunities to apply.

(Acknowledgement: E Jaques & S Clement (1991) Executive

Leadership, Oxford: Blackwell as quoted in Module 1,
Sacred Heart College Research and Development Unit.)

Understanding schools as organisations • 53

 3.9 How does one change schools from ‘top-down’
to participatory management?
The following information has been taken from a
Department of Education (1998) document called
Implementing OBE 3 – School Management. This document
includes a number of practical and realistic suggestions on
ways to shift your school from the old-style hierarchical
style of management to the new style participatory style.

3.9.1 Principals lead rather than instruct

Principals who operate as leaders realise that their status as
principal is dependent on the support of their staff. In other
words, their status depends on their ability to lead and to
motivate their team of educators so that they make changes.
In the past, most people simply respected and obeyed
school managers because of their high status rather than
because of their ability to lead and to get things done. There
was often a ‘them’ and an ‘us’ attitude.
In new schools, the principals must be seen to be leading
learners and educators to achieve desired outcomes, rather
than simply instructing them.

3.9.2 The decision-making hierarchy becomes flatter

In the past, decisions were made at the top and then passed
down through a clearly-defined hierarchy: from the
principal to the HODs and then to the educators, and lastly
to learners. There are a number of problems with this
hierarchical style. It is undemocratic and does not fit well
with the new democracy in South Africa. Decisions are
often lost or are misunderstood as they are passed down the
hierarchy and this means that things are often not done or
are done badly. It helps create a ‘don’t care’ attitude among
many educators and learners because they have no power
to shape the school and to make decisions. This makes it
difficult for change to occur.
Schools should try to reduce the rungs on the hierarchical
ladder to develop flatter, more open, more participative
structures. This will allow better information flows, and will
create an atmosphere in which all members feel a sense of
ownership. This, in turn, makes it easier for managers to
lead rather than to instruct.

54 • Effective School Leadership and Management

3.9.3 The roles we play become more flexible
Our country is changing rapidly. But many of our schools
still lock educators into very fixed roles and responsibilities.
New schools require a much more flexible structure so
that they can adapt to change. This would mean making it
possible for an educator who is good at public relations
work to take on this type of task rather than the principal
performing it because the educator in question is more
likely to achieve the desired output of improving the
school’s image. Likewise, the principal may teach
Mathematics because, in this way, the school’s other desired
outcomes – better results – may be achieved. Roles and
functions need to be reassessed so that individuals have the
capacity and willingness to respond quickly to changing
situations and new demands.

3.9.4 Responsibility is shared – we can’t simply blame

the principal
The move towards a more flexible and less hierarchical
structure means that responsibility is shared. Effective
teamwork is the hallmark of successful learning
organisations. When teams can be brought together to serve
the needs of the moment more quickly, more effective
results can be achieved. Tying down individuals into
separate and independent areas of responsibility inhibits the
capacity of an organisation to respond to change
successfully.
If a culture of teamwork and brainstorming has been
developed in a school, it is likely that the imagination and
creativity of people will be much greater. The task teams that
work together are far more likely to solve particular problems
more imaginatively than if a single individual – perhaps the
principal – is held responsible for doing everything.

Understanding schools as organisations • 55

 How can we
improve our learner
discipline?
Appoint peer
counsellors. Educators must
Lock the gates arrive on time
after 8:00. to teach.

Call parents Withdraw

to school. privileges.
Enforce our code
of conduct.

3.9.5 Leadership is about empowering participants, not

wielding power
Some schools invest too much authority and control in too
few people. Creating a collaborative management culture
requires that those in senior management positions learn to
use their leadership to empower others in the organisation,
rather than to control them.
Leadership then becomes a process of building
participation and collaboration. In other words, good
principals acknowledge that they don’t know everything.
They draw on the expertise around them, and actively
develop this expertise.

56 • Effective School Leadership and Management

3.9.6 Developing rather than delivering expertise
Good schools create processes and structures that develop
expertise among others, rather than having a few (usually
management people) continue to deliver their own
expertise. In order to achieve this a system of staff
development is vital. There are at least three essential
development processes:
• All members of the school staff have management roles.
This requires an effective system of staff appraisal and
staff development policies that are of a high quality and
match the needs and aspirations of both individual staff
and the organisation as a whole.
• In a rapidly changing environment, educators will have to
update their professional and subject knowledge regularly
so that they can continue to develop appropriate and
useful learning in their learners.
• Educators may also be asked to play entirely different
roles. For instance, there may be no demand for a
Biblical Studies educator, but a great demand for
educators of Computer Literacy. Good schools will
develop processes and structures that encourage the
development of flexible educators who can teach well in
different areas.

3.9.7 Commanding respect through stature, not through

status
Principals and educators in ‘new’ schools command respect
without having to use their status in a threatening way.
Respect (and authority) is achieved through the stature of
the educator or principal. In old-style schools (or
organisations), status was entrenched through privileges,
like company cars, or special parking, or special staff rooms
for HODs, or names on the doors of senior managers. Such
distinctions between ‘the management’ and ‘the workers’
created mistrust and resentment.
In recent years, an emphasis has been placed on the
effectiveness of schools as learning organisations. This
involves a commitment to continuous development and
improvement, and constant striving for small but significant
improvements in a process that involves everyone in the
school. A school’s success will be measured by its meeting

Understanding schools as organisations • 57

 pre-defined and measurable performance indicators that
must be related to its key function of educating young
people.

3.9.8 Creating a culture of learning rather than

controlling behaviour
In the past many school managers assumed that educators
(and learners) in the school would not be able to work
without constant direction and supervision; without tight
control. In new schools, the approach is to ensure that the
agreed-on outputs are achieved because educators and
learners accept that they will work towards these outputs
without constant supervision.
The task of school managers – which includes principals,
HODs and educators – is to create and develop a culture
that enables committed educators and learners to do their
work. However, such a culture should also have
mechanisms for dealing with individuals who don’t do their
jobs. But decisions to reprimand should be agreed upon by
educators, and should always include suggestions as to how
the educator in question could improve his or her
performance. In other words, it’s about creating a system
where good educators are rewarded and poor educators are
given the opportunity to develop. But rather than the latter
being a reprimanding by the principal, it should be through
a system that makes it natural to work hard and to work
well.

58 • Effective School Leadership and Management