The MeTEOR Makeover

John and Bill own and run MeTEOR Education.¹ Their mission is to inspire and support communities in providing world-class learning environments. When we first met to discuss updating their mission, values, purpose, and strategy they provided me with a list of 10 values. I went through each one of the 10 values and asked:

• What does it look like, in practice?
• What decisions or actions can I independently take based on it?
• Are these really the values that run the place when you're not there?

My last question opened up a lengthy conversation. When Peter Drucker said that, “Culture eats strategy for breakfast,” he was referring to shadow culture. Most leaders know the Drucker maxim but few actually appreciate its significance and application.

The Shadow Culture

Values are like plays in a sports competition. They get executed in the heat of the moment under high pressure and rapidly changing conditions. Sometimes they are brilliantly executed, sometimes not. If the coach doesn't have first-hand experience of being in the heat of the moment as a player, then his or her instructions will come across fuzzy, wooden, and scripted.

Without building that level of reality and tangibility that the first graders were engaged in earlier, their shadow culture will prevail. It says, “This is how we really do things around here.” If a new plan, program, teaching model, or software program cuts across the shadow culture it says, “No, thank you. We're happy doing things the old way.”

Shadow culture is happy to outlast, outlive, act out, passively resist, and even sabotage a new strategy to preserve itself.

“Change management” has become the institutional solution for getting “buy-in” and dealing with resistance. But that approach never addresses the field of play. When organizations start with strategy they assume they can coax the culture to buy in or, if met with resistance, simply drive the change they want. These are big mistakes. Shadow culture is far too savvy and knows when it is being patronized or manipulated. It is also too powerful to underestimate.

Instead of investing hours and dollars building a 100-slide PowerPoint presentation and scheduling a road show of town hall meetings, we recommend that leaders get to know their organization's shadow culture.

Dining Room and Kitchen Culture

The next step for Bill and John was to meet together with the MeTEOR leadership team and set up a project-based learning assignment. I used Chef Ramsay and his show Hell's Kitchen to describe the difference between the dining room culture (the published values on the back of the menu) and the kitchen culture.

The dining room is what the public sees and experiences. It reflects best behavior. But the kitchen is where the work actually gets done. If you've watched an episode of Hell's Kitchen you know that what happens in the kitchen is messy, often nasty, and sometimes a train wreck.

The “kitchen culture” helped the MeTEOR leaders to see and talk about the unvarnished truth. It revealed some behaviors and attitudes that run the place and sometimes run rampant.

When I left, I gave them a simple assignment: Keep a journal over the next month. Observe and capture two kinds of behaviors. First, those spontaneous behaviors that impress and make you feel proud. Second, those that make you shake your head and wonder, “What were they thinking?”

That assignment is also a vital exercise for every teacher. As a coach it puts you back in the field of play and lets you experience the expectations that seem to be clear and consistent to the coaches, but may be fuzzy to the players. It will also help you see where they cut across the shadow culture.

After a month the MeTEOR team reconvened. The session began by sitting in a large open circle with each manager sharing overall observations, including highlights and lowlights. The team then spent the next 15 minutes discovering the top five behaviors in each category, writing them on sticky notes and then posting them on the wall. When they finished, the wall had more than a hundred sticky notes. The next step grouped all of the sticky notes into five categories. We used different-colored sticky notes for positive and negative behaviors.

The main themes included The Quality of Our Work, How We Treat Each Other, The Client Experience, and others. The next step refined the lists further by ranking each of the behaviors as positive or negative. The top positive behavior was “cheerfully going the extra mile.” The top negative was “running support staff over.”

It was then time to reflect on where the behaviors came from and how the current culture reinforced them. That took the leaders to the mirror.

A Look into the Mirror

There are four sources for kitchen culture behavior.

1. The actions of (and messages sent by) leaders and teachers.
2. Behaviors that are rewarded or punished (formally or informally).
3. Behaviors that are tolerated.
4. The physical environment.

One of the unspoken messages (source #1) that the MeTEOR leadership team identified was, “We're very busy and it had better be very important to interrupt us!” How did they uncover that? No one openly said it. But the receptionist noticed that every one of them usually entered the office building talking on their smartphone and walking straight to their office and shutting the door behind them. The leadership office locations, at one end of the space, also sent a message: “You are now entering a gated community; walk very carefully and check in with our gatekeepers.”

So, what changed as a result of the makeover?

The management team first set an expectation for themselves. No manager could be on their cell phone when they came into the building. Instead, they would spend time strolling through each department and conversing with the employees.

They also changed their space away from the “us and them” message by distributing managers throughout the office, taking away gatekeepers, and changing their roles to help make managers more accessible.

When I asked the team, “What did you find that you value,” Bill answered, “I guess we value numbers. You will be recognized for good numbers and spanked for bad ones.”

Bill's candor and clarity about that shadow reality was rare and refreshing. Few organizations actually reach or are willing to acknowledge the reality of their shadow culture with that level of clarity. But without speaking the truth there is no foundation to build on. Never naming the shadow culture is why so many mission and value statements sound and feel hollow.

Adjusting Boat Behaviors

The management team used the boat analogy to define what the different engagement levels looked like (Figure 12.2). They took a close look at the range of behaviors from their “ethnographic” research, and from that defined front of the boat behaviors, middle of the boat behaviors, and back of the boat behaviors. For the first time MeTEOR Education had clarity and a taxonomy to set expectations around specific valued and unacceptable behaviors.

With the project completed, it came time to present the findings in a company-wide meeting. The management team took turns sharing the journey. The employees responded well; the company was in the middle of a three-year growth cycle. This meant that structures, roles, and people were navigating change and working hard to keep up. Managers were stretched and expectations had gotten fuzzy and sometimes contradictory. Clarity was welcomed.

After the presentation, it was time for one-on-one meetings with the “back of the boat” members. The power behind this conversation lie partially in the new question: “Where are you in the boat and where do you want to be?” Defining the three kinds of boat behaviors gave tangible and specific definitions and examples. They were not simply handed a list of generic traits such as respect, honesty, integrity, and world-class service. The original list of 10 value statements was reduced to five short headlines, a corresponding icon, followed by a brief description and supported with several examples of what the behavior looks like.

Here is one example:

1. Headline: We travel in one boat together.
2. Icon: A boat with 10 people in it showing the front rowers, a middle group observing and two in the back drilling a hole.
3. Description: The family cares about each other and succeeds together.
4. Examples:
   • We use the language of “we.”
   • No scapegoats.
   • We know each other's professional and personal pain points.
   • We celebrate together and mourn together.
   • We produce artifacts of our success, like family portraits.

So what happened to the five? The final necessary piece to shifting this boat was the actual observed examples of back of the boat behavior. The managers had reconnected with the employees through first-hand observation and by leading by example and changing their own behaviors and habits.

Bill and John did not know what to expect and were actually concerned because these five people represented top revenue producers. If the values and observations were not clear it would have been easy to fall back into acquiescence, slapping wrists, and within a few days, the whole thing would fall back into old and negative behaviors. The message would have been, “We say everyone is equally important, but some are more equal than others. And they get a pass when they misbehave.”

This is one of the dilemmas of leadership, teaching, and parenting; when faced with two competing values, which one wins?

The process created a clear, clean, and healthy approach to the next crucial set of conversations. Each employee heard what was observed and clear explanations of why their behaviors were unacceptable, and so on. It led the conversation to considering the pressures that these employees felt and how they were trying to live up to those expectations. The conversations once again verified that it is never a one-way street. Mature managers know that they set the tone and that they are part of the needed change.

With that insight and humility Bill and John found that most of the boat members were completely unaware of the impact of their negative behavior. Some appreciated the feedback and wanted to be seen as front of the boat members as well as respected leaders. Not everyone, however, received it well. The good news is that three of the five quickly moved closer to the front of the boat. The other good news is that the other two left.

Bill, very excited, called to share progress after a couple of months of the new changes settling in, “I wish we had done this months ago. John and I were really concerned that we might lose some of our heavy hitters. But we haven't missed a beat in our numbers. The headaches those employees brought are gone and the morale has never been better!”

Many leaders make a mistake by assuming that they can somehow create culture, as if it is the simple result of a brainstorm session. “Let's choose values we like, values that reflect who we think we are, and values that employees can get excited about.” Without going back onto the field of play to see and feel the competing pressures that employees face, the shadow culture will swallow it all whole. And very possibly swallow you with it.

Culture is never created brand new; it grows out of what already exists. Culture already resides deep within the school or other organization. It lives along a simple quadrant with one continuum of healthy or unhealthy and the other continuum of by design or by default. You can move a culture, shape it, and even transform it, but you can't invent it during a workshop or strategic planning session.

The Right Brain Side of Change

During my experience at TAG Consulting we saw many organizations struggle with change. Because our focus was cultural change, we saw these struggles through a different lens. In one case a company followed one of the renowned eight-step methods from Harvard Business School. The steps roughly follow this progression.

1. We have a burning platform. If we don't change we perish.
2. We need a small committed cadre to take up the cause.
3. If we do change, here is a picture of our better future.
4. We will find early adopters who can empower others; they will lead our first efforts.
5. This map will make those first steps easier.
6. We will reinforce and return with the message to stay focused and committed.
7. We will focus on early wins to build confidence and experience.
8. We will celebrate wins and progress to solidify our new direction.

All of the steps above are what we might label as left-brain elements of change. They are rational and sequential. But that is not how you or I experience deep change. We lose our balance, feel insecure, question our worth, feel anxious, and go from feeling confident to having to relearn all over again. These are right-brain elements. Deep change is emotional.

The health and strength of the shadow culture determines its adaptability and the pace of change that it can embrace (or digest). Resistance is simply a symptom or a barometer. When we overlook (or refuse to address) the sense of loss people feel leaving the familiar or feeling disconnected or incompetent in the new world, then we send a deeper message to the whole organization (and our kids). If we overlook building bridges for people to see and feel what it will be like in the new world and see for themselves that they can make it, they will resist and feel left behind.

What about Education?

The Education Machine also has cultures that will eat the best strategies. When the shadow culture in Newark was ignored, it ate over $200 million. The shadow culture at Chicago's Fenger Academy saw “superstars” in education like Paul Vallas, Arne Duncan, and Liz Dozier proclaim bold strategies and spend several million dollars to make a difference. Fenger's performance has not improved during those 20 years. All three individuals, however, have moved on and up in that strange world where image trumps results. Culture ate their strategy. The November 15, 2015, Politico headline told readers, “Here's Why $7 Billion Didn't Help America's Worst Schools.” I repeat, “Culture eats strategy!” For some strange reason, that seems to be the single most ignored truth in business and education . . . and if ignored it leads to failure.

The Leadership Triangle

I am one of those people who sometime use a hammer to attack a problem that needs a wrench. I will look at a people problem and quickly and naturally take action to move everyone toward the goal. My natural bias is toward what are called strategic solutions. And it serves me well . . . most of the time.

But I have a friend and colleague who will look at the same people problem and break it apart to look for the underlying process, a checklist, or its logic to help move a group onto the same page. That has served him well.

Then there is Joe, a Jungian psychologist. He will look at the same people problem and see the unspoken behavior dynamic. Joe sees hidden patterns that reveal incongruity, entitlement, low trust, ego, manipulation, or suppressed anger. He is gifted at seeing the hidden values that govern conversations. These require not only a change in behavior, but also a deeper shift in being. That is because they are adaptive or transformational issues.

All three approaches are important. Most people have a natural bent toward one, but we all need to develop a more layered awareness of the kind of problems we are really dealing with, and some skills that may not come naturally, in order to be effective. Most of us know the line “If all I have is a hammer then every problem looks like a nail.”

These examples describe the three sides to a model that TAG Consulting created called the Leadership Triangle. They developed it because their consultants consistently encountered leaders who implemented programs that resulted in bigger problems and unintended consequences. Let's look at the three legs of the triangle:

1. Tactical problems are solved through technical expertise and good execution. About 80 percent of challenges fall into tactical or technical decisions. Examples might include bringing in specialists to support kids with learning differences or to implement new education software.
2. Strategic problems address direction and priorities. Perhaps 10 percent of challenges are strategic in nature. When external change or demands challenge the status quo, leaders must consider the competing values and interests. He or she must solicit open and candid feedback, set a direction, rank priorities, and then lead alignment. An example might include, “Which learning model do we want to adopt for the future, Project-Based Learning or becoming a STEM-focused school?”
3. Transformational challenges (also about 10 percent) address problems that question fundamental assumptions about the values and purpose of the organization. Or, they work with the culture shift needed by choosing a new strategy like Project-Based Learning. Examples include a school being placed on academic watch, a school scandal, a new principal, the unforeseen death of a student or teacher or a safety breach. These all raise basic questions about who we are as a school, what we believe, and who we need to become.

If the underlying problem is a lack of understanding or experience, then training and coaching are probably the best solution. If the underlying problem is a lack of focus and clarity, then the strategic questions should be addressed.

But if underlying problems are due to misaligned values, negative attitudes, and bad habits, then applying more training (a tactical approach) will only make the problem worse. Furthermore, that approach will create greater disengagement and resistance. Convening a visioning session to inspire (a strategic approach) will also make the problem worse if the underlying causes are misaligned values.

Most leaders do not consider what kind of problem they face. I would recommend that those leaders design meetings by identifying agenda topics as tactical, strategic, or transformational (changing behaviors and attitudes). Tactical or technical challenges can often be addressed in less than 10 minutes. Because they have a finite range of options, discussion can be limited to picking one, implementing it, and tracking progress.

Strategic challenges require dialogue, debate, and some form of getting on the same page with support for moving forward. Strategic topics normally range between 30 and 90 minutes. In most cases, setting a realistic time limit adds the right constraints to guide the group to a decision.

A sign that you may have a transformational or adaptive challenge is when you reach a point in the meeting where you decide to decide, but don't really decide. In other words the issue becomes tabled for future discussion. A second sign is when the same problems keep recurring and keep resisting all solutions.

Transformational challenges raise questions about what an organization really values. They will reveal deeper questions about relevancy or values misalignments. These discussions often lead into a series of meetings that allow deeper discovery, reflection, and debate. If leaders artificially cap the process or curtail vital conversations, they will inevitably drive a manufactured decision that is guaranteed to backfire and generate a ripple effect of unintended consequences.

We have found that teams that use the Leadership Triangle as a framework for identifying issues reach decisions with greater clarity and speed. It also helps them tackle those deeper transformational issues with realistic expectations and an understanding of the change agent role.

Agents of Change

If we apply the lens of culture to the larger challenge of the Education Machine we clearly see its true shadow nature. The machine values high test scores, following instructions, sitting still, and conformity. It consistently produces anxiety, insecurity, unfairness, loneliness, boredom, inflexibility, and gaming the system. The machine is impatient, unforgiving, and capricious.

In an upcoming chapter, titled “Leading Change at Your School” we provide examples, lessons, and principles for changing culture so that it will support you and not eat your new vision and strategy.

This next chapter reveals how to get your investment in technology to actually work and deliver on its promise of transformational learning. Most people tend to use new technologies inside a Gutenberg framework of learning. I know a man who actually used his first computer as a typewriter for printing voluminous studies; he never hit “save.” Like him, we've all treated digital tools like caged animals in a zoo. They draw our curiosity and imagination but until we see them in their natural habitat we will never really understand those creatures. You will learn how the natural habitat of learning with digital tools moves us out of a caged push mode of education into the free-range experience of pull learning.