Mutual respect and attrition in public schools

RAMNATH BANNERJEE (not his real name) worked in a leading public school of this country, and was often berated by his head of department and his vice principal. He performed his duties at a standard that satisfied himself and which appeared to find favour with his principal. His feeling of ill-usage at the hands of the two gentlemen festered for three years before he decided to resign and look elsewhere for employment. He found happiness at another school where he is today, a happy, contented academic. So why did he leave? He left because he felt he received no respect from his superiors. His contention was that he ended up doing all the work and receiving no credit for it, the principal's approbation notwithstanding.

He is not alone. Academics can be the most contrary beings, says Professor Mycroft Holmes, academician at the Royal Society. Academic jealousy often overcomes rationality and the ultimate victim is the institution. He feels, with firm conviction, that the main reason why people leave the best of jobs is because they get demoralised when they feel they do not receive the respect that they feel they deserve.I asked Prof. Holmes, who conducts workshops in staff retention and development world-wide, how we in the Indian scenario could deal with the single largest problem in the premier institutions of our country. He told us of the young university double-first (first division and first rank in the university), a Rhodes scholar, who was a college-level sportsman and an actor of no mean talent who was recruited from the campus of the top college in the country.

The selection committee noted his enthusiasm and his easy popularity, and as he appeared in every way perfect for the job in their premier public school, offered him the post of the head of department. It is significant that four heads of department had resigned and left the school in apparent despair. The members of the department wanted one of their own, and systematically sabotaged heads brought in from outside. Prof. Holmes' example, an outsider, and very much younger, albeit eminently better qualified strategised a method to short-circuit the system. He first postponed assuming the leadership role. He spent the first two months learning about the institution. He went to all the teachers who reported directly to him and asked them for tips and pointers on how to make his role successful. He asked them what was critical to the job and requested them for ideas on how to make his tenure a successful one, both for the department and the school. Prof. Holmes pointed out that the young head very quickly established the department's needs, what every individual wanted and how they expected him to achieve their goals. In short, he made them unwittingly provide the solutions themselves. By the third month, the young man was instituting changes; he knew the history of the issue and its challenges. His work was vested in the team process. He showed that he respected the experience of his colleagues, while they began to develop a healthy respect for his ability, knowledge and openness. The respect he received was phenomenal, and as his department supported him wholeheartedly, the result was apparent in the school's result in that subject. Every leaver scored merit ranking in the field.

In another case, Prof. Holmes cited the case of a teacher whose efforts in his field were constantly of a standard difficult to parallel. By virtue of his consistent excellent performance in the classroom with his students and in sports (squash), he was elevated to the head of his department. Suddenly, the performance was affected, enough to be remarked upon by the academic council. Prof. Holmes, who was called in at this juncture, discovered that the department that had welcomed him as its head, did not want to work with him at all. At departmental meetings, members would not contribute, and reviews were invariably conducted in monosyllables. The problem, Prof. Holmes says, was that the young head believed that asking for help and assistance would make him appear needy, dependent, and therefore, incompetent. The crux of the problem was that he made his department feel subordinated and left out. Prof. Holmes suggested that he ask his colleagues for their views, and give them the praise where it was due. Once he did this, they began to support his initiatives, and the department became an inter-dependent, cohesive entity. The others felt respected, and so did the head. Subsequent results spoke for themselves.

Professor Holmes also has solutions for those who are not heads or in authority over others. They too, he says, can take proactive steps to gain respect. These steps involve clarifying one's role, defining one's boundaries, respecting oneself, and being confident on the job. A public school teacher's job is an exacting one, demanding a great deal from the individual. Incumbents need to establish credibility and that can come, Prof. Holmes says, only through competence and transparency. Clarifying miscommunication of misunderstanding is vital. Being respectful to others includes being sensitive to their time, their needs and the contributions they make.

Prof. Holmes says, make the mistake of always subordinating your needs for space and time. While being obliging is good, doing it all the time leads to loss of respect. One will get bullied into making sacrifices that will eventually drive one to leave. Setting boundaries is an absolute necessity, he says.

The problem about Indian public schools, Prof. Holmes notes, is that review meetings restrict themselves at best to academic or pastoral issues, and sometimes, sports or extra-curricular issues are raised. He points out that personal issues are never brought up. The Indian public teacher is quite easily the most hardworking, and among the most erudite in the world, but regrettably, they never seem to bring up personal concerns which will eventually negatively impact their performance. It is essential to tell one's head that there is a feeling that one's talent is under- utilised or unappreciated so that the head can then take steps to address the issue. If the head does not know, what, asks Prof. Holmes, can he (or she) do about it? In the context of giving this data, the professor cautions teachers to do so in the context of one's being able to improve one's performance and by extension, that of the institution. In presenting a problem, it is appropriate to suggest an acceptable solution as well.

Ideally, according to Prof. Holmes, the institution will want to build a sense of mutual respect. If however, real efforts have been made, and nothing seems to be working, a reality check' is in order. Describe the situation to someone trusted, who will look at the matter from a distance and present his/her perspective. Then, and only then, must one start lining up fresh options. If the institution saps one's spirit and one's confidence, the best indicated course of action is precipitate departure.

V. Siddharthacharry,

IFS (Retd.)

Chairman, AVK Schools.

In conversation with

Prof. M. Holmes,

Consultant, Schools Matter, Kent, U.K.