Wednesday, February 26, 2025

Culture Components - Symbols




One key component when examining organisational culture is symbols. Symbols can take many forms, including words, gestures, images, or objects that carry particular meaning within a culture. In a school setting, these symbols help shape perceptions, reinforce values, and communicate leadership priorities.

For example, a headteacher delivering a speech about a new teaching and learning policy—perhaps introduced by a newly appointed assistant headteacher—serves as more than just an announcement. It acts as a symbolic gesture of commitment to the policy and a public display of support for the new leader. These moments are powerful in shaping how staff and students perceive change and leadership within the school.

One of the most recognisable symbols of a school’s culture is its logo. A well-designed logo can instantly communicate an organisation’s ethos, history, and values. It becomes a visual shorthand for the school’s identity, reinforced through uniforms, signage, official documents, and even digital platforms. Beyond aesthetics, a logo can instil pride, unity, and a sense of belonging among students, staff, and the wider community.

However, cultural symbols in schools extend far beyond logos. Rituals, traditions, and shared language—such as school mottos, house systems, or annual events such as information evenings—play a vital role in reinforcing an institution’s values. School leaders, therefore, must be intentional about the symbols they create, promote, and sustain, as these elements shape the lived experience of the school community.

Symbols also take the form of rituals and traditions. Events like morning assemblies, or even simple greetings from school leaders contribute to the culture of a school. When a headteacher personally greets students at the gate each morning, it signals a culture of warmth, accessibility, and engagement. Similarly, recognising students’ achievements—whether through merit badges, certificates, or a place on an honours board—reinforces the school’s values of hard work and excellence.

Another crucial cultural symbol is language. The words and phrases used by school leaders help shape identity and expectations. A school that refers to its students as “scholars” rather than “pupils” subtly reinforces a culture of high aspiration. Storytelling is another powerful leadership tool—when a headteacher shares the school’s history or success stories, they create a shared narrative that strengthens the school’s identity.

Even the physical environment can serve as a cultural symbol. The layout of a school, the way classrooms are designed, and the presence of communal areas all communicate something about the school’s values. A school that dedicates a wall to student artwork highlights creativity. A quiet reflection garden signals a focus on well-being. Leaders must consider how their school’s spaces align with and reinforce its broader cultural message.

School leaders play a crucial role in shaping culture, and symbols are a powerful yet often overlooked aspect of this process. Whether through logos, rituals, language, or physical spaces, these symbols send messages about what is valued and prioritised within the school community. By being intentional about the symbols they cultivate, school leaders can create a culture that inspires, unites, and strengthens their school’s ethos.

Sunday, February 23, 2025

Tournament Tables

Let’s explore how headline targets for measuring school performance have changed over time. This was discussed by George Leckie and Harvey Goldstein in their 2016 paper, The Evolution of School League Tables in England 1992–2016.

Since 1992, school performance tables have been published for state-funded secondary schools. Initially, they focused on a headline measure of school attainment, based on the percentage of pupils achieving five or more A to C grades in their GCSEs. The A grade* was introduced two years later.

In 2002, this system evolved to include ‘value-added,’ where the government introduced a measure assessing how well schools performed based on a pupil’s attainment on entry (measured by their primary school Key Stage 2 test scores). This was amended in 2006, requiring two of these GCSEs to be in English and Maths. At the same time, ‘value-added’ was replaced with ‘contextual value-added,’ which accounted for additional factors such as age, gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. However, in 2011, contextual value-added was scrapped and replaced once again with the simplified ‘value-added’ measure.

By 2016, the government introduced ‘Progress 8’ and ‘Attainment 8,’ which measured progress and attainment across English, Maths, and six further subjects. Then in 2017, a new GCSE grading system was introduced, replacing letter grades (A*–G) with a numeric scale (9–1).

The Cultural Impact on School Leadership
A key issue with Progress 8 and Attainment 8 is that they are reported against a national average for England, meaning that many schools will never meet the target. If all schools improve, the national average rises, making success a moving target. This reinforces a system of competition over collegiality, which is why I often refer to school performance tables as ‘School Tournament Tables.’

For school leaders, this creates an immense pressure to deliver results at all costs. The relentless focus on performance metrics drives a culture of data-driven accountability, often at the expense of broader educational values such as pastoral care, creativity, and holistic learning. Leaders are compelled to prioritize exam outcomes over long-term student development, not because they believe this is the best approach, but because the system demands it.

This culture shapes decision-making at every level. Schools are forced to strategically allocate resources to maximize Progress 8 scores, sometimes sidelining subjects that do not directly contribute to performance tables. Moreover, the pressure to avoid negative Ofsted judgments means that leaders must balance ethical considerations with the harsh realities of league table survival.

This constant evolution of school performance measures reflects deeper cultural values—particularly those of competition, accountability, and statistical benchmarking. Schools are expected to continuously adapt or risk collapsing under the statistical weight of performance tables and being effectively ‘knocked out’ of the tournament.

The question remains: Is this culture sustainable? And more importantly, does it truly serve the best interests of students, teachers, and school leaders?

Thursday, February 20, 2025

Culture Drain

There are numerous instances of successful school leaders being brought in to improve the culture of struggling schools. This is particularly common when a headteacher from an Ofsted-rated ‘Outstanding’ school is promoted to an executive headship role, overseeing both their current school and an additional ‘failing’ school.

At first glance, this approach seems logical—if a leader has cultivated excellence in one school, surely they can replicate that success elsewhere? However, in several stark examples, this strategy has backfired. Rather than the struggling school improving, both schools have ultimately regressed, with the original successful school losing its Outstanding status.

I call this phenomenon the ‘Culture Drain’—the challenge of extracting the culture of one successful school and attempting to transplant it into another. In the process, the original school risks losing the very essence of what made it successful in the first place.

A notable example of this can be found in a 2016 Ofsted report on a school in Cumbria. The report suggested that leadership had been negatively impacted when the headteacher was tasked with turning around two additional failing schools. While some may debate the inspectors’ conclusions, the underlying issue is clear:

Why Culture Drain Happens

1) Leadership & Staff Are Stretched Too Thin
School culture is not just about the headteacher; it relies on strong, embedded leadership teams. When key figures are removed, it weakens the culture of the original school without necessarily improving the other.

2) Culture Is Deeply Rooted & Context-Specific
A school’s culture is not a one-size-fits-all formula. It is shaped by its staff, students, community, and history. Simply transporting a leader to a new environment does not guarantee the same cultural success.

3) Sustainable Change Requires More Than a Single Leader
Meaningful cultural transformation requires a team-driven effort. If the leadership structure relies too heavily on one person, it becomes fragile. Removing key staff risks destabilizing both schools.

While strong leadership is vital, sustainable school improvement cannot rely on a single individual. Rather than attempting to duplicate culture, a more effective strategy may be to develop and empower leadership teams within each school, ensuring cultural change is deep-rooted and resilient.


Types of Culture

An increasing misconception in educational literature is the use of the word "culture" when what is actually being discussed is a very specific type of culture—organisational culture. However, before we explore this further, let us first consider the term "culture" itself, which Edgar Schein, the former professor at the MIT Sloan School of Management, argues has a "checkered history." The term is frequently used in broad and varied ways, and this complexity can be traced back to 1952, when anthropologists Alfred Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn examined over 150 definitions of culture. Furthermore, this problem is compounded when investigating culture in schools, as such examinations have generally been superficial. To provide some clarity, Schein categorised culture into three distinct definitions.

Culture as a Person
The first definition of culture refers to an individual’s level of cultural knowledge and appreciation. A "cultured" person is someone who is well-versed in a variety of subjects, including architecture, classical art and literature, ballet, and other forms of high culture. It also encompasses traits such as curiosity, open-mindedness, and tolerance for people from diverse backgrounds. Often, when people describe someone as cultured, they imply a level of sophistication or a "good" education, though in reality, this is frequently associated with social elitism and an upper-class background rather than genuine intellectual depths.

Culture as a Society
The second definition of culture pertains to the customs, traditions, and rituals that societies or groups develop over time. In this context, "society" can refer to both a geographical location and the culture of a particular people within that location. For example, those living in the Arctic have developed vastly different customs and ways of life compared to those living in the Sahara. However, in the modern era, with the rise of the internet and increasing globalisation, societies are becoming less isolated, leading to the blending and evolution of cultural practices.

This definition is often used to describe national cultures, such as the culture of France or the culture of the United States, and can also be applied to racial or ethnic cultures within a given country.

Culture as a an Organisation
The third and most relevant definition, particularly in discussions about schools, is organisational culture. Organisational culture is a specific type of culture unique to an institution, guiding its values, operations, and overall ethos. The organisational culture of one school within a trust can differ significantly from another, just as two stores from the same retail chain may have vastly different workplace environments.

This distinction is crucial in education, as it explains why simply transferring a successful school leader into a struggling school does not always yield the desired results. Organisational culture is deeply embedded within an institution, shaping the behaviours and expectations of its members, and is not something that can be easily transplanted from one setting to another.

Recognising these distinctions is essential for meaningful discussions about school culture. When educators and policymakers talk about "changing the culture of a school," they are often referring to its organisational culture rather than broader societal or individual cultural aspects. Understanding this can lead to more effective strategies for school improvement and a clearer dialogue about what truly shapes educational environments.

Tuesday, February 18, 2025

Cognitive Load

One compelling example of the power of routine can be found in a North London school, famously branded by the media as "the strictest school in Britain." While such a label carries a degree of sensationalism, what truly defines this school is not its harshness, but its deeply embedded routines. Interestingly, despite its reputation for military-like precision, visitors frequently report that students appear genuinely happy—even appreciative of the structured environment.

To understand this counterintuitive phenomenon, we can turn to Cognitive Load Theory (CLT). This theory, as explained by Shibli and West (2018)suggests that:

“Our working memory—the part of our mind that processes what we are currently doing—can only deal with a limited amount of information at one time.”

In other words, when students must constantly think about what they should be doing next—where to sit, how to enter a classroom, how to transition between activities—their cognitive resources are drained by trivial decisions. However, when routines are taught, practiced, and internalised, these processes become automatic, freeing up students’ working memory to focus on more complex learning tasks.

The benefits extend beyond academics. Successfully completing complex tasks releases dopamine, a neurotransmitter associated with pleasure, motivation, and reward. This creates a positive feedback loop:

  1. Clear routines reduce cognitive load.
  2. Students can focus on higher-order thinking.
  3. Success in learning triggers dopamine release.
  4. Dopamine improves attention, memory, and motivation.
  5. Motivated students engage more, leading to greater achievement.

This cycle explains why students in highly structured schools often appear happier and more engaged. The sense of predictability and security fosters confidence, allowing students to channel their energy into academic and personal growth rather than navigating uncertainty.

For school leaders, this highlights a critical question: Are routines in their schools consistently applied, and are they embedded deeply enough to become an integral part of the school’s culture? A well-structured environment does not stifle students—it empowers them.

Lethal Mutations

“In education, the tem ‘lethal mutation’ can sometimes be used to describe the phenomenon of perfectly sensible approaches to teaching being misunderstood or misapplied, to the point that they become harmful to students’ outcomes.” — David Didau, Teachwire.net

One striking example of a lethal mutation can be found in the now-infamous restoration of Ecce Homo (Latin for “Behold the Man”), a 1930s Spanish painting by Elías García Martínez, depicting Jesus crowned with thorns. In 2012, an 81-year-old, untrained amateur artist attempted to restore the fading artwork. The results were so dramatically altered that authorities initially suspected vandalism. However, it soon became clear that the painting had simply been entrusted to someone lacking the necessary expertise. The once-reverent depiction of Christ was transformed into an unrecognisable figure, mockingly nicknamed ‘Monkey Christ’ or ‘Potato Jesus’. Ironically, despite—or perhaps because of—the disastrous outcome, the painting became an unexpected internet sensation and tourist attraction.

This case serves as a powerful metaphor for the dangers of lethal mutations in education. How often have we seen a well-intended school initiative—logical in theory—warp into something entirely different within weeks of implementation? A strategy meant to enhance teaching and learning can, without careful oversight and understanding, become counterproductive or even damaging.

This risk is particularly acute when attempting cultural change, where small misunderstandings or misapplications can ripple through an organisation with unintended consequences. The key to avoiding lethal mutations is to ensure that everyone involved understands not just the ‘what’ of an initiative, but also the ‘why’. A clear vision, combined with a structured framework for change, can help mitigate distortions and ensure that well-intentioned ideas lead to meaningful improvements rather than unintended failures.

Critical Mass

The term ‘critical mass’ originates from nuclear physics, where it refers to the smallest amount of fissile material required to sustain a nuclear chain reaction. Once this threshold is reached, the reaction becomes self-sustaining and increasingly powerful.

Over time, this concept has been widely adopted as a metaphor in popular culture, social sciences, and organisational theory. It is commonly used to describe situations in which a significant shift occurs once a certain number of people adopt a behaviour, support an idea, or enter a particular setting.

As Oliver (2013, p.1) explains:

“The term has diffused into popular culture and social science and is widely used to refer to any context in which things change after a certain number of people get together or enter a setting.”

In an organisational or school context, achieving critical mass can be essential for driving cultural change. Whether implementing new teaching practices, shifting school values, or embedding behavioural norms, reaching this tipping point ensures that change gains momentum and becomes self-sustaining.

Thus, understanding and strategically cultivating critical mass is crucial for leaders aiming to create lasting and meaningful transformation in their institutions.

Group Norms

Norms serve as the unwritten rules that guide behaviour. Essentially, norms dictate what is considered appropriate or inappropriate conduct within an organisation. They play a crucial role in shaping organisational culture by establishing shared expectations, which help maintain consistency and cohesion. By reinforcing desired behaviours, norms contribute to an organisation’s efficiency, reliability, and innovation.

Norms in Schools
Some common and easily recognisable norms include not smoking in the workplace or maintaining good timekeeping. In schools, norms often manifest at the department level, where they can vary significantly.

For example, one department may foster a corporate, business-like atmosphere, where interactions are formal and task-oriented. In contrast, another department might have a more relaxed and jovial environment, with casual discussions and a greater emphasis on camaraderie.

Interestingly, these norms are rarely written down. Instead, they emerge through the behaviour of key stakeholders, particularly department leaders and experienced staff, who unconsciously model and reinforce these expectations. This phenomenon is sometimes referred to as the ‘Chameleon Effect’, where individuals instinctively mimic the behaviour, attitudes, and speech patterns of those around them, often without realising it.

The Power of Group Influence on Norms
The impact of group behaviour on norms was demonstrated in a 1968 study by Bibb Latané and John Darley. In their experiment, students were placed in a room where smoke was slowly seeping in. When alone, participants were more likely to report the issue as a potential danger. However, when placed in a group where others had been instructed to remain passive, they were far less likely to take action.

This study illustrates the powerful influence of group behaviour on individual decision-making. In a school setting, it highlights the importance of key stakeholders—such as senior leaders, department heads, and experienced teachers—consciously modelling the desired cultural norms.

Shaping a Strong School Culture
For a school culture to thrive, it is essential that high-profile staff consistently embody and demonstrate the school’s core values and expectations. If leadership fails to model these norms, they may struggle to embed and sustain a positive school culture. Therefore, school leaders must ensure that expectations are not only clearly communicated but also visibly upheld by those in influential positions.

Force Field



Barriers to change are factors that actively resist and push back against transformation. Just as the same poles of a magnet repel each other, change efforts can meet opposition that prevents progress. Without careful management, change may become ineffective or inconsequential. When attempting to reshape the culture of an organisation, these barriers can be covert (subtle resistance) or overt (direct opposition), making it essential to identify and address them early.

One useful framework for understanding these opposing forces comes from Kurt Lewin, a German-American psychologist. His Force Field Analysis provides a structured way to examine driving forces (which push change forward) and resisting forces (which hold it back). By applying this model, school leaders can focus not only on strengthening the drivers of change but also on reducing or eliminating the barriers that prevent progress.

A Car on the Motorway: A Metaphor for Change
A simple way to visualise the dynamic between drivers and barriers is to imagine you are driving a car on a motorway, heading toward a destination we’ll call “ideal culture”.
  • The accelerator represents the driving forces that propel you forward. The more drivers of change you have, the higher the gear, and the faster you move toward your goal.
  • The brakes represent the resisting forces—applying them slows you down, making progress more difficult.
  • If too many resisting forces build up, you may even shift into reverse, moving further away from your ideal culture.

In extreme cases, overwhelming resistance can lead to a crash—a metaphor for organisational stagnation, confusion, or conflict, ultimately preventing change from ever taking place.

The Role of School Leaders
For change to be successful, school leaders must actively manage both drivers and barriers. This means:
  • Identifying key driving forces that will push the school in the right direction.
  • Recognising and addressing resistance early before it gains momentum.
  • Creating a culture where staff feel empowered to contribute to change, rather than resist it.

By doing so, school leaders ensure that their school is not just moving toward an ideal culture, but doing so smoothly, effectively, and without unnecessary disruption.


Radical Candor

Rituals are the procedures and practices that signal what is important within a school. The more prominent the ritual, the more it emphasizes its significance to the organisation. Unlike routines, rituals are often less frequent and may lead to different outcomes each time they occur. Examples of school rituals can be seen in staff training programmes, promotions, and assessment processes.

For instance, a school that dedicates time every week to staff development training focused on teaching and learning sends a clear message that pedagogical growth is a core priority. Similarly, in the classroom, establishing regular sessions focused on feedback and improvement signals to students the value placed on continuous learning and progress.

Radical Candor as a Ritual
One particularly effective ritual for fostering open communication is the practice of giving feedback in the style of ‘radical candor’—a concept introduced by former Apple and Google executive Kim Malone Scott in her 2017 book, Radical Candor: Be a Kick-Ass Boss Without Losing Your Humanity.

Radical candor is a leadership approach that balances caring personally while challenging directly. It encourages honest, constructive conversations where feedback is both respectful and candid. This means praising effectively while also delivering clear, unfiltered critique, ensuring that feedback is both helpful and actionable. Scott argues that this method creates a culture of trust and accountability, allowing employees to grow without fear of ambiguity or hidden criticism.

In a school setting, adopting radical candor as a ritual could significantly enhance professional dialogue and development—provided staff receive proper training on how to implement it effectively. Without guidance, this approach could easily mutate into unfiltered criticism or even conflict. However, when used correctly, radical candor can create a culture where staff feel supported, students receive honest and constructive feedback, and continuous improvement becomes embedded in the school ethos.

Know the Why!






One way to reduce resistance to school improvement is by clearly explaining the ‘why’ behind the change. Doing so can be an effective strategy for increasing staff buy-in. This concept is explained by leadership expert Simon Sinek in his Golden Circle model, which he first popularised in his 2006 TED Talk.

Sinek argues that most organisations understand the ‘what’—that is, what they do. For example, a business sells a product, while a school provides education. Some organisations also understand the ‘how’—the elements that set them apart from the competition. In a school’s case, this might be a strong academic focus with high numbers of Oxbridge admissions or an emphasis on developing well-rounded students who become good citizens.

However, Sinek emphasises that very few organisations truly understand their ‘why’—their core purpose and the fundamental reason they exist. The ‘why’ gives employees a meaningful reason to engage with and support the organisation. Yet, it must go beyond simply making money for a business or providing a ‘good’ education for a school.

For this reason, every school must take the time to carefully define and communicate its ‘why’, ensuring that staff, students, and the wider school community understand and connect with its core purpose.


Culture Sculptor

Simply stating the values or desired culture does not make it a reality. How many leaders take the time to first assess the existing culture—and more importantly, how do they know what it truly is? Can a new culture simply be pasted over the old one, or will the previous culture inevitably seep through, much like stubborn mould that keeps reappearing in the corner of a bathroom?

A powerful analogy for cultural transformation can be found in Michelangelo’s statue of David. Before it became a masterpiece, it was merely a block of marble, excavated from an Italian quarry. Initially, in 1464, the sculptor Agostino di Duccio began working on it, only for the project to stall. Twelve years later, another Italian sculptor, Antonio Rossellino, took over—until his contract was abruptly terminated. The block then sat untouched for over 25 years. Finally, in 1501, the young Michelangelo was commissioned to complete the statue, and two years later, he transformed it into one of the most celebrated sculptures in history.

This journey is strikingly similar to cultural change—leaders are rarely working with a blank slate. Instead, they are building on what came before, shaping and refining an existing foundation. And just as Michelangelo needed the knowledge and skill to assess what had already been done, school leaders must develop the tools and understanding to work with the real culture of their organisation, not just the one they aspire to create.

This also explains why many leaders struggle to change school culture—they fail to properly diagnose what already exists before attempting to reshape it. Without this understanding, even the most well-intended initiatives risk being rejected, diluted, or undermined by deeply embedded traditions and behaviours.

A practical solution to this challenge is simple: ask questions—lots of them. Engage in open conversations with staff, observe daily practices, and listen actively to understand the real culture at play. This is especially critical for new headteachers. A highly effective strategy is to meet with every employee during the first half-term, creating opportunities to hear different perspectives and begin shaping change from a place of genuine understanding.


Culture Iceberg


An often-cited depiction of organisational culture is provided by Edgar Schein, who uses an iceberg model to illustrate how the three levels of culture interact. These levels range from highly visible and observable aspects to deeper, unconscious elements that are less immediately apparent.

The Three Layers of Schein’s Model

1. Artefacts
The artefacts of a
n organisation are its physical and social representations of culture, which are easily observable. These can be seen in architecture, office spaces, language, slogans, logos, and even in staff storytelling or meetings. However, despite their visibility, artefacts can be ambiguous and open to interpretation, sometimes making them difficult to fully understand.

For example, consider the Building Schools for the Future initiative—a secondary school building programme in England during the 2000s. This programme provided many headteachers with an opportunity to reshape their school environments. However, in many cases, the cultural significance of these designs was unclear or, at worst, a missed opportunity.

2. Espoused Values
The next leve
l, espoused values, is less visible than artefacts but often more clearly defined. These include strategies, mission statements, policies, organisational charts, and contracts, all of which communicate the core values that guide how a school operates.

For instance, school websites often feature these guiding documents in one accessible location, outlining expectations for both staff (e.g., codes of conduct) and students (e.g., behaviour policies). The most effective values are those that permeate every aspect of the organisation. If a school promotes ambition as a key value, this should be reflected consistently across both staff expectations and student behaviour policies.

3. Shared Assumptions
At the d
eepest level of the model are shared assumptions—the unspoken and often unconscious beliefs that shape an organisation’s culture. These assumptions are not easily observable, yet they play a crucial role in how a school functions.

Consider a time when you attended a job interview and toured a school, meeting both staff and students. Later, when reflecting on the experience, you may have shared with colleagues, friends, or family how the school “felt”—whether it seemed like the right fit or not. This impression is rarely based on a single conversation or action; rather, it stems from subtle, underlying cultural assumptions.

Unlike artefacts or espoused values, shared assumptions are not written down. Instead, they become ingrained over time as individuals adapt and integrate into the organisation. Because of this, shared assumptions take longer to develop and solidify within a school’s culture.

Leadership Continuum


As school leaders, we must consider the source of change, which can generally be categorized as either
planned or emergent change.

Planned change is typically strategic and centrally driven, often led by senior management or external consultants. It follows a prescriptive approach and is usually associated with a shorter time frame. This method is particularly useful when a school requires urgent transformation, ensuring swift and structured improvements.

On the other hand, emergent change recognizes the role of lower-level managers and employees in shaping progress. It emphasizes the importance of context and acknowledges the ‘messier’ nature of change. Unlike planned change, emergent change is less prescriptive and not as reliant on predefined goals, making it more adaptable to evolving circumstances.

When reviewing these approaches, emergent change may be more suitable for a school where staff are already effective in their roles. For example, consider a school that has progressed from ‘Requires Improvement’ to ‘Good’ under the Ofsted framework. Initially, a planned, top-down approach may have been necessary to drive improvement. However, as the school continues to develop, a shift towards emergent change could be more beneficial in its journey towards achieving an ‘Outstanding’ rating.

A useful way to visualize this shift is through Tannenbaum and Schmidt’s Leadership Continuum, first introduced in their 1958 article How to Choose a Leadership Pattern. Their model illustrates a spectrum where, on the left, decision-making is heavily manager-centric and top-down. As the continuum moves to the right, authority is increasingly distributed, eventually leading to greater staff autonomy in decision-making.

This framework provides a clear perspective on how the source of change may evolve as a school’s culture becomes more established and desirable. As a school leader, it’s essential to reflect on which approach—planned or emergent—is most appropriate for your school at any given time and how this may shift as the school grows.

Murphy's Law

“If anything can go wrong, it will.” While there are differing accounts of who first coined this phrase, it is most often associated with Edward A. Murphy, an American aerospace engineer who worked on rocket safety-critical systems in the 1940s and 1950s—systems designed to prevent malfunctions that could result in loss of life.

The story goes that after an incorrectly installed sensor caused an issue, Murphy, blaming his assistant, remarked: “If that guy has any way of making a mistake, he will.” This statement later evolved into the widely known adage: “If anything can go wrong, it will.”

Although Murphy was reportedly unhappy with this interpretation of his law—arguing that it is more accurately understood as “always assume a worst-case scenario”—the sentiment underscores the importance of proactively identifying and addressing potential obstacles before they arise.

Murphy’s Law and the Realities of School Leadership
“If anything can go wrong, it will.” While there are differing accounts of who first coined this phrase, it is most often associated with Edward A. Murphy, an American aerospace engineer who worked o
n rocket safety-critical systems in the 1940s and 1950s—systems designed to prevent malfunctions that could result in loss of life.

The story goes that after an incorrectly installed sensor caused an issue, Murphy, blaming his assistant, remarked: “If that guy has any way of making a mistake, he will.” This statement later evolved into the widely known adage: “If anything can go wrong, it will.”

Although Murphy was reportedly unhappy with this interpretation of his law—arguing that it is more accurately understood as “always assume a worst-case scenario”—the sentiment underscores the importance of proactively identifying and addressing potential obstacles before they arise.

Murphy’s Law in School Leadership
For school leaders
, Murphy’s Law serves as a valuable lesson in preparation, risk management, and resilience. Running a school is full of unpredictable challenges, from staffing shortages and safeguarding concerns to unexpected Ofsted inspections or IT system failures on the first day of online exams. Effective leaders don’t just hope for the best—they plan for the worst while working towards the best possible outcomes.

Consider the following applications of Murphy’s Law in schools:

  • Staff Absences & Contingency Planning – A well-run school ensures there are cover plans in place because there will inevitably be days when multiple staff members are absent. Having a strong support structure, such as reliable cover supervisors or a responsive supply agency, can prevent last-minute chaos.

  • Technology Failures – From interactive whiteboards freezing mid-lesson to online assessment platforms crashing, technology is brilliant when it works—but a nightmare when it doesn’t. Backup plans and alternative teaching strategies ensure learning continues, even when tech lets you down.

  • Behaviour Policies & Implementation – Schools may have a behaviour policy in place, but if it is not clearly communicated, consistently applied, and well-understood by staff, then inconsistencies will arise. Effective leaders anticipate the human element of policies and ensure thorough training and reinforcement.

  • School Trips & Risk Management – Any experienced trip leader knows that even the best-laid plans can unravel—a coach breaks down, a student forgets their passport, or adverse weather forces a last-minute itinerary change. Successful school leaders and trip organisers anticipate potential pitfalls and ensure risk assessments are thorough and realistic.

Turning Murphy’s Law into a Leadership Strength
Rather than viewing Murphy’s Law as a pessimistic outlook, great school leaders use it as a strategy for proactive problem-solving. By assuming that things can and will go wrong, leaders can:

  • Develop a culture of preparedness – Encourage staff to think ahead and plan for worst-case scenarios
  • Create adaptable systems – Ensure policies and processes are flexible enough to withstand unexpected events.
  • Foster a resilient team – Equip staff with the confidence and autonomy to handle disruptions without panic.

Ultimately, school leadership is about balancing optimism with realism. By embracing the lessons of Murphy’s Law, leaders can build schools that are not just reactive but resilient, ensuring that even when things go wrong, the school continues to thrive.