EORG 3715 Assignment Part 1

School principals’ perceptions of team management

A significant development in the South African education system over the past
decade has been the move towards site-based management and its associated
management approaches. The concept of a team-based approach to school
management was formalised after the advent of full democracy in 1994 and the
subsequent reorganisation of the education system. The notion of team
management is rooted in theories that stress participation, notably site-based
(school-based) management, teamwork and distributed leadership.

In a study conducted on the perceptions of secondary school principals in

Grahamstown of team management, it was found that, while team management
was generally welcomed and even celebrated by principals, there were
fundamental tensions surrounding principals’ understanding of their leadership
roles in a team context. These have specific implications for leadership
development in the context of team management.

The tendency to regard school principals as solely responsible for leadership and
management of schools is gradually being replaced by the notion that leadership
and management are a shared prerogative of many.

Data were collected from questionnaires and follow-up interviews conducted

with principals and senior management team (SMT) members from 10
government-aided secondary schools in Grahamstown. The findings were
classified into three themes identified as significant:
1. The benefits of team management
2. The leadership tension
3. Threats to teamwork/team management
The benefits of team management
• Sharing the load with roles clearly allocated among SMT members.
• Empowerment of teachers and professional development of staff by using
delegation to “build on people’s strengths”; for example, by allocating
academic tasks to academically-inclined teachers.
• Site-based policy development, which included the creative use and
adaptation of policy and official guidelines.
• High levels of commitment to participative management.

The leadership tensions identified between driving teamwork and taking

accountability
On the one hand, principals saw themselves as team workers and delegators. On
the other hand, they saw themselves as leaders rather than managers, motivating
that management does not come with change while leadership requires initiation
of changes. While great participation was noted, principals felt accountable to
authorities and sometimes acted independently of others’ input. Some principals
indicated a preference to do everything themselves as they felt that they could not
abdicate responsibility for things that they were essentially accountable for.
Therefore, SMTs were somewhat restricted in terms of participation.

There was an emphasis on the principals’ key role in calling and chairing
meetings, responses frequently referred to principals as “having the final say” and
being “ultimately accountable”. Some of the functions identified in the interviews
and questionnaires indicated an acceptance of their roles as human resource (HR)
developers, such as giving guidance, making use of the staff’s skills and talents,
being open, transparent and involved, setting an example, and listening to ideas
coming from the SMT. This tension highlights the fact that team management
does not diminish the importance of leadership.
Leadership seems more important in a team environment, both in terms of its role
in developing human potential, and also, significantly, in terms of leaders’
acceptance of being ultimately accountable, almost on behalf of team members;
hence, principals felt they needed to be authoritative at times.

Threats to team management

One of the challenges that emerged was the realisation that a group of people was
not necessarily a “team”. Building a strong team is difficult as there are always
differences in opinions where people are involved. There may be personality
clashes, problems emanating from staff to other staff, personal clashes which
cannot be properly accommodated, and different agendas.

Another challenge highlighted is the need to act in ways that are “politically
correct” rather than truly participative. For example, because of the political
attitudes of some teachers, principals at times felt pressurised to consult more
broadly than they wished to. Many principals believed that if they worked as a
team, the team would convince the rest of the staff that what they were doing and
the decisions they were making were the right ones. However, the concern was
that the inclusion of Post Level 1 teachers in the SMT would create a problem
with other Post Level 1 teachers because they were left out.

Another threat to team management was the policies of the department because
it had to be ensured that whatever decision was taken was not contrary to any of
the policies of the department. Compliance with policy in managing the school
on a daily basis was a challenge team management was facing.

Principals also identified variable levels of competence among team members as

a threat. Some teachers were lazy, others had attitudes of only doing the bare
minimum required by their job descriptions, saying: “It’s not my job”, while
others were negative. This led to some being overloaded because a team is only
as strong as its weakest link.

Disloyalty to the team was another issue that surfaced in the interviews. Sabotage
was a threat to teamwork. People would agree on a course of action as an SMT
and then cause problems as they did not share the same vision, which caused
disruption within the team.

Some principals found it difficult always to trust all the team members because
the job was not being done in the way it was required. People do not always
practise what they preach, and so credibility is lost when great ideas are brought
up in meetings but are not implemented.

Some principals also felt that teamwork was time-consuming as things did not
get done quickly enough because of the process of consultation and the time it
sometimes took to make one decision.

Conclusion
Based on questionnaires, interviews and observation data, the study confirmed
that team management through SMTs was generally functioning in the 10 schools
investigated, and that the principals were committed to making it work. While the
findings pointed to significant benefits of team management, the tensions and
challenges discussed represent key challenges for educational leaders and
managers in South Africa.

To recapitulate briefly: there was the overriding tension between holding on and
letting go, and the concomitant challenge of trust as the key ingredient of building
cohesion – there was tension between mere compliance and creative, courageous
leadership and the associated challenge of social and emotional intelligence (EQ);
and there was tension between efficiency (getting the job done) and effectiveness
(honouring a commitment to teamwork and personal growth).

The prevalence of these tensions and challenges in the findings suggests that team
management is not yet entrenched in these schools. While the structures may be
in place and operational, it seems too that cultural support is lacking and that
some of the schools have not yet developed the necessary climate for the effective
functioning of teams.

Question 1

What are critical factors missing in this study that would create a solid platform
for effective teamwork? (20 Marks)

Question 2

What factors need to be considered before implementing a programme of self-

directed work teams, and what critical factors were omitted in this case study?
(15 Marks)

Question 3

Design a team-building intervention that can be used to facilitate the key aspects
required to turn the teams in the above case study into truly cohesive teams. (20
Marks)

EORG 3715 Assignment Part 2

Newtown Cable and Wiring Systems

The production manager of Newtown Cable and Wiring Systems, Mr Johnny
Smith, has asked you for advice. The company is 25 years old and a leading
supplier of cables and wires to motor manufacturing and other industries. The
production manager feels that the company is functioning below potential.
Recently, the company has obtained modern machinery that should enable it to
increase production by 70%, but it has not yet been able to capitalise on the new
technology. According to Smith, the competencies of managers and employees
are not being used optimally, and employees are not being empowered to
contribute significantly to change and development in the organisation.

Question 5

Explain the change process to Mr Smith and your role as a change agent. (25
Marks)

Question 6

As a change agent, how would you use Total Quality Management as a change
intervention to the organisation? (10 Marks)