The “Family” Myth That Complicates Everything

Julie raised an important point about the problematic framing that “we’re all a family” in independent schools. Having heard this phrase numerous times throughout my career, I’ve observed how it creates complications in managing authority relationships.

Families aren’t great models for organizations. While most families have their own dynamics and challenges, they also inherently struggle with authority structures. When we overlay this “family” narrative onto schools where clear hierarchies exist, we create a confusing environment where everyone is supposed to get along warmly while still acknowledging who holds decision-making power.

This becomes particularly relevant because we all carry deeply embedded responses to authority from our own experiences as students. We’ve had positive and negative encounters with school administrators, teachers, and institutional power structures that continue to shape how we approach these relationships as professionals.

First Steps When Authority Changes

When new leadership arrives, whether it’s a head of school, assistant head, or board chair, Julie’s advice focuses on self-awareness first. Before you can effectively build a relationship with new authority, you need to understand your own orientation to leadership.

Are you someone who tends to believe everything a person in authority says, or do you instinctively question and resist? Most of us fall somewhere in the middle and can adjust our approach, but we typically lean one direction or another. Recognizing this tendency helps you approach the new relationship more intentionally.

The second crucial element is avoiding assumptions. This seems obvious, but it’s remarkably difficult in practice, especially given the hype that typically surrounds new leadership appointments. Schools often set up unrealistic expectations by positioning new hires as the person who will “fix everything,” when in reality, they’re human beings landing in what amounts to a foreign country, trying to figure out where the restroom is while simultaneously making major decisions.

Building Trust Without Common Pitfalls

Julie introduced an important concept about avoiding what she termed being “emotionally slutty” when new leadership arrives. The temptation is real to immediately share all your frustrations and problems with the new person, hoping they’ll finally address issues that have been concerning you for years.

This approach often backfires for several reasons. First, the new leader doesn’t yet understand the context or dynamics that created these problems. Second, they’re still developing their own priorities and vision. Third, it positions you as someone who brings problems rather than solutions, which doesn’t align with the kind of partnership most leaders want to establish.

Instead, Julie advocates for positioning yourself as an ally who can help prevent the new leader from encountering unnecessary obstacles. Share information that helps them navigate successfully, offer to partner on emerging challenges, and resist the urge to either take over their responsibilities or dictate what they should prioritize.

Creating Shared Reality in Complex Environments

Julie emphasized the importance of developing “shared reality” between different perspectives in school communities. When new leadership arrives, you have their fresh outside view, your institutional knowledge perspective, and potentially the board’s strategic view—all of which may differ in important ways.

Even small differences in perception about priorities can become significant challenges if they’re not addressed through intentional conversation. Rather than immediately asking for resources or changes, focus first on helping everyone understand the current situation and challenges from multiple angles.

For example, instead of requesting more funding, you might present a concrete challenge: “We’re over-enrolled in ninth graders and need to figure out dormitory space, but I’m having trouble getting the facilities director’s attention to walk through options. What would you suggest?” This approach provides context, demonstrates you’re thinking through solutions, and asks for advice rather than immediate action.

The Unique Challenge of Board Relationships

Julie’s extensive work with boards offers insights that many heads of school learn through experience. Board cultures vary dramatically, and many first-time heads have limited exposure to board dynamics. A board that’s predominantly parents creates entirely different boundary challenges than a board of alumni and community members.

The key insight here is that traditional advice about “staying in your lane” often falls short because the boundaries between governance and management intersect in complex ways. Rather than trying to avoid these intersections, successful heads learn to navigate them thoughtfully through relationship building and clear communication.

Julie stressed the importance of meeting individually with as many board members as possible during the first six months. These one-on-one conversations allow trustees to understand your character, priorities, and vision for the school in ways that formal board meetings cannot provide.

Communication Style and the Coin of the Realm

Leadership styles vary dramatically, and what worked with your previous supervisor may not work with your new one. Julie shared the example of transitioning from a charismatic, informal leader who threw backyard barbecues to someone who preferred structured, formal receptions with tea and cookies. Neither approach is inherently better, but the cultural shift can be jarring.

The key is figuring out what Julie calls the “coin of the realm” – how does this person best receive and process information? If they prefer 20-minute meetings and email follow-ups, adjust your communication style accordingly. If they value relationship building through longer conversations, make time for that approach.

This doesn’t mean compromising your authentic self, but rather adapting your communication methods to be most effective with this particular leader’s preferences and style.

Addressing the Say/Do Gap

One of the more challenging situations Julie addressed was when leadership says one thing but rewards or reinforces different behaviors. This creates what she described as organizational toxicity because it introduces constant cognitive dissonance for everyone trying to navigate the environment.

While you can’t control another person’s behavior, you can influence dynamics through your own responses. Julie suggests finding low-stakes examples to address these disconnects rather than taking on high-emotion situations. For instance, if your school claims to be welcoming but assigns all the undesirable chaperone duties to new faculty members, that’s a concrete example you can discuss without threatening anyone’s job security.

Avoiding the Back Channel Trap

Julie’s final advice was perhaps the most important: resist the temptation to create or participate in back channels. The “meeting after the meeting” culture that exists in many schools undermines effective leadership and makes it impossible for authority figures to do their jobs well.

When someone comes to you wanting to complain about decisions or seek your help in circumventing proper channels, redirect them to the appropriate person for those conversations. This isn’t about being unsympathetic, but about maintaining healthy organizational dynamics that allow leadership to function effectively.

Back channels feel good in the moment because they provide that “warm bath” of agreement and shared frustration, but they ultimately create toxicity that hurts everyone, including the students we’re all committed to serving.

Moving Forward with Intentionality

As independent school professionals navigate the inevitable transitions that mark our field, Julie’s insights remind us that managing up is ultimately about building relationships that serve our institutional missions. It requires self-awareness, patience, clear communication, and a commitment to healthy organizational dynamics.

Whether you’re welcoming new leadership or stepping into a new reporting relationship yourself, the key is approaching these transitions with intentionality rather than assumption. Take time to understand perspectives, build trust through partnership rather than problem-dumping, and stay focused on the work that serves students and strengthens school communities.

The July 1st transition period will pass, but the relationships and dynamics established during these early months often set the tone for years to come. By managing up thoughtfully and strategically, we can help ensure these transitions strengthen rather than strain the communities we care about most.