28 Independence Vol 37 No 1 MAY 2012

WeNdy BaRelPriNciPAl, MAsADA

college, st iVes, NsW

Masada College is a coeducational day school,

with 610 students from Prep to Year 12.

Two members of Masada College’s executive

team undertook the QLPS in 2011.

Choosing the QLPS

Masada College has an internal

appraisal system for its executive,

teaching and non-teaching staff. To date

this has not been a 360-degree process

although, for teachers, appraisal does

involve peer feedback and mentoring in

a classroom situation as well as meeting

with their immediate manager.

There were a number of reasons that

prompted us to look for a 360-degree

tool for the executive team. Members

of the executive are involved with

a wide range of the members of the

College community – to a greater

extent even than the classroom teacher

– and so we believed a 360-degree

appraisal would give a broader

aPPlICaTION OF The QlPSiNsigHts iNto 360-Degree scHool leADersHiP APPrAisAl

The Quality Leadership Profile for Schools (QLPS), and its earlier variant, the Quality Leadership Profile (QLP), have been used by AHISA members for nearly a decade for the formative appraisal of themselves and their leadership teams. Independence Editor, Lyndal Wilson, talked with six Heads about their experience of the QLPS – how it was applied in their school and what, in hindsight, they might have done differently. Their comments reveal a wide diversity in the culture and practice of appraisal in schools.

aPPRaISal

perspective that better matched the

executive role.

It was also important that we gained

an objective picture, not just my own

perception or the views of those who

offer feedback without invitation.

Quite often the feedback on executive

members is extreme, and reflects

the loud voice of the people who are

unhappy about one particular thing.

Occasionally there is positive feedback

from parents, but often the views of the

‘silent majority’ are missing.

A great benefit of the survey is that it is

anonymous. People are free to express

their true opinions.

Another consideration was that the

360-degree appraisal process allowed us

to gain feedback and at the same time

show that we are keen to hear what

people think, that we value the views

of staff and parents and are prepared to

respond to feedback about how things

are managed in the school.

We chose the QLPS because it was

economical and because of a positive

recommendation from a fellow AHISA

member.

The QLPS experience

Initially when I read the QLPS

questionnaire I was surprised by the

apparently limited number of questions.

All staff at the College had recently

undertaken the Stephen Covey training,

which requires pages and pages of in

depth responses. The QLPS survey takes

little time to complete yet it produced

a very useful picture of the executive.

It also set the ground for good dialogue

between me and executive team

members.

There are aspects of the relationship

between the Principal and senior staff

members that can be awkward to

manage. It can be difficult when you

work closely with someone to also

deal with issues that are related to

personality characteristics and how they

present in relation to the workplace.

Having an objective assessment of the

executive member’s performance can

help diffuse the awkwardness.

At the same time, the Principal needs

to be ready to manage relationships if

there is a significant gap between the

appraisal results and a staff member’s

self perception. The Principal is the

only respondent to the survey who

is identifiable, by virtue of being the

sole supervisor. All other responses

are completely anonymous. It can put

a little distance between you and the

person you’ve assessed if there is a

perception gap, because the Principal

The QLPS survey takes little time to complete yet it produced a very useful picture of the executive.

Vol 37 No 1 MAY 2012 Independence 29

will inevitably symbolise the entirety of

the community’s response, not just their

own personal response.

We are now definitely interested in

introducing a 360-degree approach

into our internal appraisal system.

This will be done in a gradual way,

and with people who are keen to do

it. Many people do feel threatened by

the 360-degree approach but others are

very happy to have that feedback and

want to adjust accordingly and develop

themselves.

Follow up

My original intention was to follow up

close to the time of receiving the survey

results, but timing became problematic.

The survey was undertaken in the first

week of Term 4, which is a short and

very rushed term. A fire at the school

then turned everything upside down,

and our whole lives took on a new

dimension as we focused on managing

without many of our buildings.

The Quality Leadership Profile (QLP) ‘360-degree’ feedback appraisal tool was originally developed by Queensland University of Technology (QUT). It has been used beneficially by education leaders, including AHISA members, for some 10 years.

In 2010, AHISA partnered with QUT and the Australian Council for Educational Leaders (ACEL) to enhance and refine a version of the tool specifically for school leadership, the Quality Leadership Profile for Schools (QLPS).

QLPS appraisal results can now be mapped against the National Professional Standard for Principals, ACEL’s Leadership Capability Framework and AHISA’s own Model of Autonomous School Principalship. At the same time, the QLPS has been

developed so that benchmarking against QLP results remains valid, further enhancing the value of the new version.

Key features of the tool are its confidentiality, its capacity for benchmarking of results and the straightforwardness of the survey instrument. The survey itself takes only 10 minutes for respondents to complete online, yet results provide a comprehensive picture of leadership capabilities and behaviours.

The QLPS assesses leadership factors grouped into five overall areas: staff motivation and involvement; strategic and operational management; service focus and community outreach; academic leadership; and strategic, relational and personal capability in leadership.

Each factor is assessed by a series of questions that examine the extent to which particular capabilities/behaviours are perceived to be demonstrated. Responses are made on a five-point Likert scale. Respondents are able to choose a ‘no comment’ response for each question. The QLPS also invites open-ended comments from participants.

The appraisal process typically takes four weeks. AHISA recommends an experienced debrief of the result reports. The debrief is typically held in informal one-hour conversations and is offered by AHISA’s Director of Member Services, Malcolm Lamb.

The QLPS is managed by AHISA’s Director of Member Services. For a comprehensive information package on the QLPS, which includes a sample questionnaire, email malcolm.lamb@ahisa.edu.au.

aBOUT The QlPS

As it turned out, the delay gave staff the

opportunity to absorb the results and,

even without any consultation with me,

I have observed that executive team

members have been very professional in

moving to address any issues thrown up

by the survey. But the consultation will

still occur.

In hindsight

As Principal I found some of the questions difficult to answer, knowing that the staff member would be reading my response without the benefit of me being at hand to give an explanation. In particular, there were double-barrelled questions that were problematic, because you might agree with one half and not the other, so it’s hard to scale the answer. I think it can be a little bit misleading. The staff member might have been strong in an area covered by one half of the question but weak on the other, and this is not necessarily reflected in the result. So I would like to see some refinement of the tool.

I would also introduce the survey completely differently. I would write a personal letter to the survey respondents, explaining the process and why we are undertaking it, setting out what will be involved and assuring respondents that we’ll value their input.

JUlIe BaUd PriNciPAl, HigHVieW

cHristiAN coMMuNitY

college, MArYBorougH, Vic

Highview Christian Community College

is a coeducational day school, with 510

students from Years 7 to 12.

The Principal and the other four members

of Highview Christian Community College’s

leadership team undertook the QLPS in

2011.

Choosing the QLPS

I commenced at Highview at the start of 2007. When the Board was looking

Vol 37 No 1 MAY 2012 Independence 31

to renew my contract I suggested that I undertake the QLPS as a form of appraisal. I also suggested that the senior staff go through the process as well, because I’d found it so effective when I was a member of the senior leadership team at Radford College in the ACT.

Having the Principal and executive team undergo a 360-degree appraisal is a powerful way to introduce a more formal appraisal process into a school, and to model to staff that it can be a positive process. I also thought it would be a useful way to get some feedback from staff on the direction of the school.

The Chairman of our Board looked at

the information AHISA made available

on the QLPS and agreed it sounded like

a good way to go.

The QLPS experience

Having already experienced the forerunner of the QLPS as a senior staff member in my previous school was very helpful in explaining the appraisal process to my executive team at Highview. It was the first time they’d undergone this form of appraisal and I was able to explain that it wasn’t too stressful and was really a positive way to receive feedback on all the work we’d been doing. At the same time, I was not expecting my Radford experience of the QLPS to be exactly duplicated at Highview.

When I stepped in at Radford, the processes and policies were all in place, the teaching and learning programs were well established and there was a very effective pastoral care system. As Deputy Principal, Head of High School, I worked very closely with the Year Coordinators as well as the Principal and other senior staff. We were all working very effectively together and I had been curious, rather than anxious, to find out how the rest of the staff felt we were going.

Since my appointment as Principal at Highview, we have been making significant changes, including a major curriculum restructure and a change in the teaching and learning culture.

We’ve also had significant enrolment growth. Major change can be difficult to embrace when people have been in an organisation for a long time, so I expected the responses at Highview to reflect that.

Disparity in Highview’s and Radford’s development cycles was not the only difference. Highview College serves a low SES community – our SES score is only 87 – while Radford, with an SES score of 123, serves a quite different community.

Even so, I had confidence in the QLPS to give us high quality feedback as a leadership team, which it did.

Overall it was a very productive exercise for us at Highview. At the time, we were also finalising the details for a new strategic plan, so the feedback was very useful for that process as well, and supported our decision making around the strategic direction of the school.

For the debrief of my appraisal I met with one of the QUT academics involved in the QLPS. I then met with each of my leadership team to discuss their response to the results, and what had been well received and what we felt we needed to work on further.

I gave copies of my appraisal and the appraisals of my leadership team to the Chairman of the Board and discussed them with him. After I’d debriefed with each of my senior staff I then presented the overall results to the College Board as well. This gave the Board tremendous insight into the College. The Chairman and the Board were very pleased with the results.

Follow up

We used the appraisal process as a really good opportunity to look at how we’re doing things, and reflect on why we’re doing them. It highlighted a couple of areas that we need to work on, but we saw that as a positive.

One specific example of how we applied feedback is in the area of pastoral care. The Board discussions that took place after I presented a summary of the appraisal results led to the provision of

external counselling opportunities for the staff. This now allows staff members to choose who they would like to meet with to discuss personal issues as the College will pay for up to six counselling sessions with an external psychologist of their choice. Alternatively, they can continue to meet with the Deputy Principal - Pastoral Care, who is also a qualified counsellor.

Another area of concern highlighted during the appraisal process was one that is commonly cited in schools: the issue of communication. Some long serving staff expressed a desire for more transparency and greater communication between the leadership team, the staff and the College Board. As a result, the Communications Committee is currently being set up, comprising the Principal, Business Manager, two Board members, two teaching staff and two non-teaching staff.

AppRAISAL

The key to the success of the whole appraisal process is the quality of the debrief. The person conducting the debrief needs to be both tactful and frank: this is the time to face issues and not skirt around them. In a private environment, so long as there is an atmosphere of trust, career challenges can be turned into opportunities for the future.

Related to the debrief is the planning required for this career development. It is vital for the appraisee, no matter what their results, to leave the debrief with the beginnings of an action plan which might address weaker areas or one which ensures progress even in areas where the

judgement is ultra-positive.

MalCOlM laMBAHisA Director of MeMBer

serVices

The QlPS deBRIeF

Vol 37 No 1 MAY 2012 Independence 33

Another example is in the area of teaching and learning. Some staff commented they had concerns that students in our junior classes were working at vastly different levels. After discussing these concerns, we’ve put a lot more money into extension programs for our more gifted students and provided more support for those experiencing difficulties with their learning.

I’m very happy with the way the whole process rolled out. I would love to put my next level of staff – pastoral care leaders and Heads of Departments – through the process, but that would be a very costly exercise.

JO BedNallPriNciPAl, trANBY

college, BAlDiVis, WA

Tranby College is a coeducational day school,

with 1090 students from Kindergarten to

Year 12.

The Principal first completed the QLP in

2009. The Principal and five members of

Tranby College’s senior staff completed the

QLPS in 2011.

Choosing the QLPS

The first time I used the QLPS was when I was coming toward the end of a five-year contract and was looking for objective data about my leadership. I wanted the Board to offer me another contract! That appraisal was very helpful to the Chair in the reappointment process.

The appraisal results were also reassuring for the Board. We’re a newish school, we’d started in a very small way, and I’d been there a long time. The Board was relatively inexperienced in terms of school governance and hadn’t been proactive about instituting regular or rigorous appraisal for me. I selected a 360-degree process as meeting their needs as well as my own.

At that time the QLPS had not been developed to where it is today – it

was just the QLP – and I went into it knowing there were some questions that didn’t really fit. I had had experience of some other online appraisal tools that were business based and not at all suitable. I was attracted to the QLP because at least it was coming out of an educational paradigm and, even though the picture it would paint would be in broad brush strokes, there would be a richness in the conversations that came out of it.

The other big selling point was that it was cheap!

I did have concerns about who would facilitate the debrief. Would they understand a newly established, low fee school? I wanted to feel confident that the person debriefing would ‘get’ the school. On both occasions – in 2009 and 2011 – the debrief was facilitated by AHISA’s then Chief Executive, Allan Shaw, who had himself been start up Principal of a low fee school, and that allayed my concern.

Based on my own experience of the QLP, two years later I offered the QLPS to my executive team as a part of the regular cycle of appraisal and conversation between us. The executive team had changed and expanded by that time and I thought a 360-degree appraisal would have benefits for each individual and for us as a leadership team. It also sends a strong message to staff. We are constantly saying to staff that they need to be reflective about what they’re doing and that we want them to get feedback

from their students.

The QLPS experience

All members of the executive team agreed to undertake the QLPS. I talked with each of them individually. They could opt out, but the power of them all doing it was obvious. It was useful that as I’d used the tool on myself a couple of years earlier they were already familiar with it as respondents. They knew the instrument, and that helped make them more comfortable.

I also offered the team the opportunity to select their respondents in each category.

When the survey results for the

executive team came back, there was

first a debrief with me. Because I’d used

the tool before, I then chose to debrief

each member of the team myself. I

met each of them individually and the

conversations were just terrific.

I spent a fair bit of time with each

questionnaire before I spoke to staff

about the results, so I had a sense

of what I wanted to get out of each

meeting. I’m not really good at having

the difficult conversations, but having

data around which the difficult

conversation can be framed was very

helpful and suited my natural style,

which is to approach matters in a

coaching way, getting the staff member

to talk about what the results are saying

to them. I will be having follow up

conversations.

I then combined all the results to see

what that revealed about our strengths

and weaknesses as a team. Without

identifying who got what result, I was

able to present the combined result to

the team for discussion. That was very

powerful.

Coincidentally to undertaking the QLPS

we were running a broader survey

across the whole staff. We were able to

combine that data with the data we got

from QLPS and then go back to staff and

say, these are the areas it seems that you

want us to do better in, tell us about

AppRAISAL

We used the appraisal process as an opportunity to look at how we’re doing things, and reflect on why we’re doing them.

34 Independence Vol 37 No 1 MAY 2012

that. Areas that came out strongly across

both surveys were stronger systems

for recognition of staff performance,

greater clarity around mission and better

communication. That’s what we’re

acting on now.

In terms of my own personal experience

in undertaking the appraisal, it was very

affirming, but it was also a reality check.

You suddenly get a picture of yourself as

others see you.

I like to think I’m very inclusive and

listen to other people’s points of views

and the survey suggested that I didn’t

always! That has influenced the way I

now run meetings.

The big danger when the results come

back is that you jump straight to the

comments at the end and, in spite of

all the positive feedback, will focus in

on that one negative comment. There

is a power in the written word that is

quite distinct from the message in the

numbers and bar graphs. The debrief

is essential to help you through that.

Having had that experience was very

useful in the conversations I then had

with my executive team.

RUSSell deeR PriNciPAl, BrAeMAr

college, WooDeND, Vic

Braemar College is a coeducational day

school with 780 students from Years 5

to 12.

The Principal and five members of Braemar

College’s leadership team undertook the

QLPS in 2011.

Choosing the QLPS

I came to Braemar College from a school

where the 360-degree appraisal process

was an accepted part of the school’s

improvement culture. When I arrived

at Braemar, the annual review process

was in its infancy and did not appear

to include peer review, so there was

considerable suspicion about 360-degree

appraisal. It was seen by the teaching

staff as indicative of management

doubt about their performance rather

than as an improvement tool. Even

the introduction of class visitations

had resulted in a meeting with the

Independent Education Union staff

representative prompted by one staff

member and resulted in a delay to the

process. That was rapidly and happily

resolved, but it did show that we had a

way to go before all staff members were

ready for peer reviewing.

To introduce the concept of 360-degree

appraisal, and to begin to build our

improvement culture around self

reflection, it was therefore essential

that we used an appraisal tool that had

industry backing.

The QLPS was an obvious choice. The

majority of 360-degree type evaluative

tools are business oriented and staff

would have been dismissive of a

business related tool. The QLPS has the

right language and it is has background

benchmarking against our own sector.

That was really important.

The QLPS experience

To lay the foundations for a peer review

process to become part of the College’s

appraisal culture it was necessary to

lead by example.

It was announced that I would

undertake the QLPS as an example of

gathering feedback throughout the entire

organisation about my performance. I

explained to all the College’s teaching

and non-teaching staff that I would be

undertaking the survey first, then my

leadership team would be undertaking

the same process, then staff annual

review meetings would begin. The

review meetings of teaching staff would

not at this point entail 360-degree

appraisals but would include class

observations by the leadership team.

Five of the seven in my leadership team

undertook the survey. There were two

who were new employees and I made

a deliberate choice that only those who

had been in the role for longer than one

year should be surveyed. At that point

I’d been Principal for just over a year.

For the Principal and leadership team

to undertake a 360-degree appraisal

was a very powerful message about

peer review. It wasn’t a case of just one

person walking into your classroom;

here was the whole organisation

reviewing you! Even so, many staff

remained skeptical about the process,

even as respondents, and I went through

a double process of allocating staff to

respond to leadership team members’

surveys to assure staff that it was a

random selection and that responses

would be anonymous.

As Principal, you are identifiable as a

respondent to members of the leadership

team and that did influence the way I

responded to some points; specifically,

those issues that I had not previously

discussed with the person being

surveyed. I noted those areas for follow

up in the debrief or in later discussion.

I sat in on the debrief with every one of

my leadership team.

I was also aware that, as there was

no existing culture of peer review in

the College, there were likely to be

some perception gaps that could come

as a shock to those being surveyed.

This is where a skilled debrief added

tremendous value to the whole process.

I was debriefed by AHISA’s then

Chief Executive Allan Shaw with the

AppRAISAL

There is a power in the written word that is quite distinct from the message in the numbers and bar graphs.

Vol 37 No 1 MAY 2012 Independence 35

College’s Chair. Allan and AHISA’s

Director of Member Services, Malcolm

Lamb, facilitated the debrief with the

leadership team.

Follow up

The QLPS survey was a good reflective

process but there are still learnings to

come out of it. Filling in a survey and

having an hour’s chat was the easy bit!

I am assisting the leadership team in

framing goals for this year and for

next year based around strengths and

weaknesses that were identified in the

QLPS, and I’m undertaking the same

process. My QLPS was reviewed by

the Chair and together we’ve identified

areas of potential where I can strengthen

my performance. It’s been a really

good platform to move forward in my

own personal development in the eyes

of what the Chair and the Board are

wanting.

The value of having the Principal and

leadership team surveyed around the

same time is that it has enabled us

to work quite deeply on improving

leadership performance in the College.

In hindsight

Communication around the survey

needs to be carefully managed. I did not

forward to staff sufficient information

about the survey and that caused

unnecessary anxiety about anonymity,

for example.

I also discovered that some respondents

were expecting to see the results of the

surveys, a bit like seeing results after

contributing to an online newspaper

poll. In the case of a 360-degree

appraisal that is not appropriate.

I should have drawn far more heavily

on the information provided by AHISA

to communicate with staff about what

the survey tool is, what its purposes are

and what the outcomes will be. I could

also have spelled out far more clearly

how the appraisal process related to

professional standards, learning and

reflection.

One of our leadership team taking the

survey was in a non-teaching role and

some of the questions in the survey

had no real relevance to that person.

Because this form of appraisal was so

foreign to our community this raised

a question mark in the minds of those

responding to the survey. If we had

removed those questions the experience

of the respondents would have been far

more positive.

I am aiming to utilise the tool for the

other members of my team this year, to

complete the survey of the leadership

team.

This process has sparked a far greater

focus on data for improvement and

using the data in meaningful ways.

dR ROdeRIC KeFFORd aMHeADMAster, BArker

college, HorNsBY, NsW

Barker College is an all-boys school from

Kindergarten to Year 9, and coeducational

in Years 10 to 12. It has 2015 students,

including 46 girl and boy boarders in Years

10 to 12.

Three members of Barker College’s Junior

School leadership team undertook the QLPS

in 2010.

Choosing the QLPS

I had undertaken full 360-degree surveys

as part of both my five- and 10-year

appraisals, each conducted by an

external consultant. I had heard AHISA’s

then Chief Executive speak about the

QLPS, so when I was looking to review

leadership in our Junior School and was

considering using a 360-degree tool as

part of that process I contacted Allan

Shaw to discuss whether the QLPS

would be appropriate for Barker.

The benchmarking and debrief elements

of the QLPS are distinct advantages.

Our internal appraisal process for

senior staff involves a wide canvassing

of opinion from those who are both

subordinate and superior, but it’s not as

comprehensive as a full 360-degree tool

and is not externally benchmarked.

The QLPS experience

Three staff members were involved in

the review: our Head of Junior School;

Deputy Head of Junior School; and

Deputy Head of Curriculum.

The thought of undergoing a 360-degree

appraisal can be daunting, so I

discussed with each team member

individually what is involved in the

process and how I thought they would

benefit. I think all three understood

that the appraisal is aimed at enhancing

performance and professional learning.

For me as Headmaster the process

was very affirming, as the results

were an objective confirmation of my

own perceptions. At the same time,

the surveys were a strong reminder

of the impact of leaders on those they

influence. That impact can be clearly

read, in black and white, across the

survey responses.

The benchmarking capacity of the

QLPS was particularly affirming for two

staff members. Knowing that you are

up there with the best of the best is a

tremendous shot in the arm.

This is a thankless game. We’re not

good at thanking each other and the

further up the hierarchy you go the less

thanks you probably get. So a formal,

AppRAISAL

This process has sparked a far greater focus on data for improvement and using the data in meaningful ways.

Vol 37 No 1 MAY 2012 Independence 37

objective, professionally conducted

external appraisal process that provides

the sort of affirmation and appreciation

that most teachers like, but don’t always

get, is a professional fillip to those who

undergo it.

As a result, our strategy is now to provide

more systematic positive feedback to

people. We’ve encouraged a culture in

which it’s okay for a subordinate to say,

‘I really appreciated the way you did

that’, or ‘Thank you for your help with

that task’, or ‘I’ve been grateful for your

leadership in that way’. This has been

a very positive influence in the Junior

School and is becoming part and parcel

of how we work with each other.

The benchmarking also provided

inescapable evidence for one staff

member that there were areas of their

performance that needed urgent further

development. That person chose not to

accept the performance management

program that I offered and no longer

works with us.

The debrief process was exceedingly

helpful, both to the staff members

concerned and also for me, as they were

debriefed in my presence. It is one of

the unique elements of the QLPS. There

is the self appraisal element, where you

do your own questionnaire; there is the

response from others; and then there

is the facilitator’s analysis of all that,

which you get in a face to face debrief.

This is a really good model for

educational settings, where so much of

the measurement of our performance

as teachers is qualitative. We all

know what we mean by the phrase

‘a good teacher’, but we also know

how challenging it is to put standards

around it. The new national teaching

standards are a useful objectification of

dimensions of teacher behaviour that

we can observe and quantify, but there

are also subtleties of personality and

personal style and personal preference

that are involved. An individual debrief

helps to focus on some of the areas that

an appraisal tool doesn’t measure but

that nonetheless are able to be taken

into account because of the presence of

a human evaluator.

Follow up

The QLPS is tailored to be a very

personal appraisal approach. As such it

was a tremendous opportunity for us to

focus on individual performances, and

it provided us with very helpful insights

into how people work. At the same time,

it gave us the opportunity to look at

how processes work in our school and

how the leadership function is delivered.

When our Deputy Head of Junior

School departed we had the chance to

apply some of what we had learned by

changing the leadership framework,

and what has emerged is a much flatter

structure. I created a position for Head

of Early Learning who looks after K-3,

and a Head of Middle Years who looks

after Grades 4-6. We have retained the

grade coordinator positions. This has

the effect of providing more people with

experience at a middle leader level in

primary school.

One of the things I think we’re going

to have to watch, particularly in order

to keep men engaged in primary

education, is to provide more promotion

opportunities for them. At secondary

level there are Heads of Department

and House Masters and so on, but in

the primary school it’s much harder to

create a hierarchy through which young

male teachers can move.

So a major benefit of the appraisal was

that it allowed us to take a fresh look

at our Junior School administrative

structure. I believe we’re now delivering

a higher quality of educational leadership

by distributing it more widely in a flatter

model.

What has also emerged is a stronger

awareness among staff of the value of

having their own peers and, particularly

for people in senior positions, their

own subordinates reflect on their

performance.

BelINda PROvISPriNciPAl, seYMour

college, gleN osMoND, sA

Seymour College is a day and boarding

school for girls, with 865 students from

Reception to Year 12.

Seven members of Seymour College’s senior

leadership team undertook the QLPS in

2011.

Choosing the QLPS

We have a system of regular appraisal

at Seymour College and have devised

an appraisal tool specifically for our

community and our culture which we

use predominantly for our teaching staff.

We adapted that tool as best we could

for our leadership team but found it

was a little cumbersome. That was one

consideration in looking for an external

appraisal tool.

Another important consideration

was the logistics around appraising a

relatively large senior leadership team.

Having a third party come in and

manage the process for us has actually

created a lot of efficiencies.

The other thing that prompted us to

look beyond our own tool is the notion

of benchmarking. That we can actually

AppRAISAL

The QLPS gave us the opportunity to look at how processes work in our school and how the leadership function is delivered.

Vol 37 No 1 MAY 2012 Independence 39

get a snapshot of how we sit in terms

of feedback relative to peers across the

nation has been really useful for the

leadership team.

A further attraction of the QLPS is

that it has the flexibility to allow us to

collect data that is specific to Seymour.

Obviously this data won’t be nationally

benchmarked, but having the option to

create some questions specific to our

environment is attractive.

I think staff found it reassuring that

this is a tool that has been around

for a while and has a strong record of

use. It has also been tailored to fit a

school context and, in particular, an

independent school culture. I looked

at other tools that were recommended,

but the QLPS was the only one to

show a very good understanding of the

independent school culture in Australia.

The QLPS experience

As our leadership team is large, we

extended the process over a year. A few

team members pioneered the process

for us, with the idea that we could

then evaluate whether to continue the

process.

On this occasion, I did not undertake

the QLPS myself as I’d already done

a couple of thorough appraisals as

Principal, but my own experience of

appraisal enabled me to appreciate the

reservations of team members.

I am sure that some people probably

found the notion of a 360-degree

appraisal a little daunting, given the

lack of recent experience of this form

of leadership appraisal due to the gaps

in our own system. Some were also

cautious about the involvement of a

third party, that the process was not just

in-house, but there are two sides to that

coin. A third party can offer a number of

benefits, but I appreciate the potential to

add a layer of anxiety.

It was positive for us that the facilitator

for the debriefing was AHISA’s Director

of Member Services, Malcolm Lamb.

Malcolm has a fine reputation in SA,

and nationally, and is known by many

of our staff. I think that helped make

the notion of a third party debrief more

comfortable. Malcolm also worked hard

to alleviate anxieties, and very early

on in the debrief assured people of the

confidentiality of the process and the

results.

Three members of the leadership team

took the appraisal in the first instance.

They then spoke at a leadership team

meeting, describing their experience

as positive. Another four staff then

undertook the appraisal, with a further

four soon to follow this year.

I sat in on the individual debriefs with

staff. From a Principal’s perspective,

it’s useful to have another party able

to lead the discussion with a member

of the team, and my role really was

just to comment as needed. I think

it’s important that the Principal sits in

on the debrief and that it is an open

discussion, but mostly there was little

need for me to speak during the process.

My role involved being able, on most

occasions, to affirm the staff member.

In preparation for the debriefing, I

familiarised myself with the appraisal

results. This revealed some aspects of

our school culture which provided a

useful context for discussing individual

results during the debrief sessions. I

found, for instance, that the ratings

by the leadership team members as a

respondent group tended to consistently

sit just below the benchmark average response for that group. In other words, our leadership team members appraise themselves and each other to a very high standard!

It can generate a discussion that, maybe, we do expect a lot – sometimes maybe too much – of ourselves and our team.

At the same time, the results were mostly not surprising. That’s a good sign because it means that we’re communicating quite honestly and openly on a daily basis with one another, and that people are aware of how they’re performing their role. So on the whole the process has been a great opportunity for affirmation.

Follow up

Just as we do with our own in-house appraisal tool that we use with other staff, our follow up process on the QLPS is fairly low key. The staff member is asked to reflect on the feedback and to identify the goals and professional development they wish to set for themselves. They then meet with me to talk that through and we set a plan for the coming year.

In some instances the plan might involve using the same tool again after a year or so and to review the results.

In hindsight

I think it would be useful if there were opportunities in the questionnaire to comment after each section and not only at the end. As the tool currently stands, it’s hard to comment on specific skill sets along the way, and the qualitative data is as important as the quantitative data, and often more useful. As the QLPS can be customised, that is one area we might look at for application at Seymour.

This article may also be viewed on open access as part of AHISA’s Leadership Perspectives Series at www.ahisa.edu.au/resources/leadership-perspectives/.

AppRAISAL

Staff found it reassuring that this is a tool that has been around for a while and has a strong record of use.