Sir Steve Lancashire is Chair of Forum Strategy’s National #TrustLeaders CEO network. He also provides mentoring for CEOs across our network and through the Being The CEO programme. In this month’s blog, Sir Steve shares his thoughts around the current culture of ‘high stakes’ accountability pervading the education system and how we might move towards something better for the benefit of all in education.
From a catwalk of consequences to a runway for redemption: time for an accountability makeover
Little did I know when Alice and I discussed and agreed on the subject of this month’s blog what a rabbit hole I would fall down. I should have known. It’s just a word, but some words gain heightened significance because they are tethered to negative or positive associations, and thus we have a visceral response to them. Let’s play a game and try it. I’ll give you the word and you note how it makes you feel.
Ready…..? Accountability.
What was your response? Good? Bad? indifferent? Did you instinctively shrug your shoulders and think, it’s just a part of life, an unavoidable evil? Or did you, perhaps, acknowledge it as an old acquaintance and think, ‘yep, I’ve come to terms with that?’ Or did you smile, open your arms and think welcome friend, bring it on? I suspect amongst all our dear readers there was a full range of these responses (and more!), each according to their own experience and mindset.
Let’s play again. Ready….? Ofsted (Don’t get technical on me and shout that’s not a word!)
How about now then? A different response? Different feelings?
I like this game, again!
Ready….? ESFA. Oh Alright , once more…. Regional Schools Director.
Enough of that game, I feel dizzy and just a tiny bit queasy.
a hn I’ve been very naughty, of course, and cheated (that’s what you do in games, right?) because I’ve purposely confused two things; the concept of accountability itself with the names of the oversight bodies currently used as the main mechanisms to provide accountability. Slapped wrists for me.
Is it such a cheat though?
I think I could argue, in fact I’m going to, that conflating Ofsted inspections and our experience of those oversight bodies and regulators named above with our broader perception of accountability is understandable, given that it represents our primary encounter with such oversight. Furthermore, I believe the whole ‘package’ has left an indelible mark on our perception of accountability, steering it, I would argue, towards a negative trajectory.
In a system that currently prioritises bureaucratic compliance over holistic improvement, which emphasises standardised metrics and rigid frameworks, whose one-size-fits-all approach regularly fails to account for the diverse needs and contexts within our sector and which, even if it’s unintentional, places incessant pressure to meet predefined one-word benchmarks, diverting attention from the far more important, far more nuanced aspects of education and public service, it’s not surprising that our perception of it all might not be entirely positive. But there’s more isn’t there? Add into the mix the high stakes and sometimes severe consequences when, in being held accountable in this way, we are deemed to be subpar, there is no wonder that this could lead some to a fear of accountability.
And that’s a real shame. Because accountability, when done properly, can be a real force for good.
Where I fell down the rabbit hole is in trying to explain this because it’s both a simple and yet very complex concept. On one hand, it simply embodies responsibility and answerability for actions. So far so good. We all probably feel comfortable with this. Its complexity arises from the diverse contexts in which it operates. It isn’t a one-size-fits-all notion; it varies across sectors, cultures, and professions. In addition, balancing individual responsibility with systemic factors and recognising the unintended consequences of rigid frameworks that try to define the parameters by which we are held accountable, all contribute to its complexity. Introducing the dynamic interplay between personal, organisational, and societal responsibilities renders accountability a very nuanced and intricate concept. Indeed, I decided a better brain than mine needs to grapple with this – Michael Pain has written an extensive piece here on what we mean at Forum Strategy by ‘pure accountability’ and how it has huge potential to help trusts reimagine the power and potential of accountability at a local level. Phew! This concept has also featured significantly in the six principles of Thriving Trusts developed by Forum Strategy over the last twelve months.
“accountability, when done properly, can be a real force for good”
Whilst down the rabbit hole of extensive reading though I did enjoy learning that “accountability” derives from the late Latin ‘accomptare’ (to account), a prefixed form of ‘computare’ (to calculate), which in turn is derived from ‘putare’ (to reckon). And while the word itself doesn’t appear in English until its use in 13th Century Norman England, the concept of account-giving has ancient roots in record-keeping activities related to governance and money-lending systems that first developed in Ancient Egypt, Israel, Babylon, Greece, and later Rome. That level of knowledge I can cope with.
Where I felt on much more solid ground is in the raison d’être of accountability. Even here though it got quite esoteric. On the ‘why’ of accountability, Bentham (18th century philosopher and social reformer) gives an interesting perspective on it. He believed, ‘the more strictly we are watched, the better we behave’. Couldn’t we debate that for an age?
Rabbit hole here I come. Nietzsche (!) recognised, ‘we give an account only when it is requested, and only when that request is backed up by power’. Consider that and our current context.
But let me reign it in a bit. I said I was on more solid ground. I’ll use words from the American writer B.J. Neblett to give context to this solid ground:
“We are the sum total of our experiences. Those experiences – be they positive or negative – make us the person we are, at any given point in our lives. And, like a flowing river, those same experiences, and those yet to come, continue to influence and reshape the person we are, and the person we become. None of us are the same as we were yesterday, nor will be tomorrow.”
My experience tells me that without accountability there is a real danger that we fail children and communities. And this cannot be allowed to happen.
My views on accountability are most definitely shaped by my experience as a teacher, headteacher, and CEO. I have only ever worked in failing schools and I have spent an educational lifetime sorting out the carnage left by those who didn’t do their job well enough and were not held to account soon enough. I know this sounds harsh, and I know that there will be lots of reasons why this might have happened. It doesn’t matter. A child’s one chance at a decent education is too precious for those responsible for it not to be held to proper account. Me included.
“I have only ever worked in failing schools and I have spent an educational lifetime sorting out the carnage left by those who didn’t do their job well enough and were not held to account soon enough.”
I’m proud of a lot of things as a CEO, most of all, taking action so that 18,000 children (think of that number of young lives) moved very quickly from being educated in a failing school to getting an at least good education. But it should never have happened in the first place and proper accountability would have prevented it.
But this is an unusually negative, down beat view from one with such a sunny disposition as I, so let’s flip it a bit. Accountability has to be more than a safety net against failure, surely?
Yes. Here’s a bold assertion. Done properly (I’ll come back to that phrase) proper accountability is a force for good as it ensures responsible conduct, builds trust, improves performance, and contributes to the overall well-being and effectiveness of individuals and organisations. It is a foundational element for ethical, transparent, effective and sustainable practice. Wow, really?
Yes. Here’s some of the ways I think this is true.
A robust accountability framework encourages ethical behaviour. When we know that both as individuals and as organisations we will be held to account for our actions and how we conduct ourselves we are more likely, I believe, to adhere to ethical standards, promoting integrity and responsible conduct. I talked last month about keeping true to ourselves and our ‘true north’ and having ‘scaffolds’ to help us adhere to this. Putting our conduct under scrutiny in a formal way is just a bigger version of looking in the mirror without flinching. Of course, we have some pretty good descriptors of this in the Nolan Principles, but as educators, we currently pretty much self-regulate against these. It wouldn’t be a bad idea, I think, to incorporate this into a more sophisticated accountability typography to really evaluate how authentic we are as trust leaders. There is a rather dramatic mechanism for holding other societal leaders to account on this front. We can vote politicians out on how they conduct themselves, for example. I know this particular issue is going to have a big influence on where I place my X sometime this year.
“a robust accountability framework encourages ethical behaviour. When we know that both as individuals and as organisations we will be held to account for our actions and how we conduct ourselves we are more likely, I believe, to adhere to ethical standards”
Whilst it’s perhaps not as glamorous, accountability mechanisms do help us comply with laws and regulations, and legal and regulatory compliance is pretty essential for ethical organisational conduct and, of course, is inherently good for business. This compliance builds trust with our stakeholders, and fosters a positive reputation and trust image. Beyond ethical considerations, it mitigates the risk of legal consequences, financial penalties, and reputational damage. We can’t really argue with the fact that aligning business practices with legal standards not only upholds ethical principles but also establishes a foundation for sustainable growth, stakeholder loyalty, and long-term success. I always call this ‘organisational hygiene’ and over the years have come to realise that it’s the bedrock of the best organisations. And let’s not ignore an elephant in the room. Accountability acts as a safeguard against mismanagement, fraud, or negligence. Knowing that actions will be scrutinised and that there are consequences for improper conduct should deter individuals and organisations from engaging in detrimental practices. Doesn’t always work. The early days of the academy movement are sometimes referred to as the ‘wild west’ for a reason and I’m sure we have all heard shocking stories of misdemeanours made possible by lack of regulation and proper accountability. The sector was tarnished for a while as a result of this and here’s one CEO who got really fed up with having his motives questioned because of the crimes and misdemeanours of few. I’m glad we are now under much more scrutiny on this front.
Accountability measures, at their best, should empower our stakeholders, those we serve. It should do this by providing them with transparent insights into our actions and our performance so they can gain a clear understanding of how well we are fulfilling our responsibilities – and, in many ways, we are back to this concept of pure accountability again and potential for us to thoughtfully and diligently drive some of this, both locally and as a sector. This transparency can help build trust, can foster a sense of involvement and offer assurance. With this transparency, stakeholders, of course, can hold us to account and play merry hell when we fall short. So they should, the stakes are too high. But I would argue that these accountability measures also offer a platform for constructive feedback, enabling stakeholders to actively participate in our improvement journey. Through transparent accountability, we can cultivate stronger relationships, enhance credibility, and ensure alignment with the expectations of those most invested in our success. Take a look at the Forum Strategy thinking for how this could look.
“accountability measures also offer a platform for constructive feedback, enabling stakeholders to actively participate in our improvement journey”
I don’t think any of us would argue against the fact that at the centre of great organisations sit great relationships and when we are held accountable and meet the standards, I believe this helps establish a foundation of trust and reliability which are the very lifeblood of effective relationships. Accountability as a harbinger of trust and reliability if often overlooked.
The million-dollar question at the heart of all this, of course, is does/will this accountability actually help us improve? Help us better deliver on our core purpose.
No way are we going to have universal agreement on this. We each start with our own intellectual and personal bias on this front, and each will be influenced in our beliefs by the experiences we have had of it.
Purists would argue that accountability leads to organisational improvement as a result of performance evaluation and feedback. That assessment and scrutiny enables us to identify areas for improvement and thus implement the necessary changes, fostering a culture of learning and advancement. I think they would also argue that clearly defined accountability measures align individual and organisational actions with overall objectives. This alignment ensures that efforts are directed toward shared goals, promoting efficiency and effectiveness. Accountability measures bring clarity and coalesce action, as it were. There are a dozen more arguments on this side of the fence, my grossly simplistic examples just give a flavour of the thinking.
On the other hand those that argue the opposite, that accountability measures do not lead to improvement and even worse, get in the way of it, would say things like the metrics and techniques used to hold us to account are (dare I use this word?) inadequate. That weak and improperly designed accountability metrics fail to accurately measure performance or identify areas for improvement. Furthermore, and I’m going to come back to this, that they actually measure the wrong things. Another argument would be that without the necessary resources, training, or support systems, we may struggle to meet accountability expectations anyway and that in the current financial climate it’s unrealistic to be held to account in this way. Those that have a real downer on the whole thing would say that accountability measures focus solely on punitive actions and as a result we are tempted to prioritise avoiding consequences rather than genuinely seeking improvement.
“Another argument would be that without the necessary resources, training, or support systems, we may struggle to meet accountability expectations anyway and that in the current financial climate it’s unrealistic to be held to account in this way.”
I’m using extremes here just to illustrate how polarised people can become on this issue.
I’m somewhere in the middle of it all which is not a fudge because I’ve already said that I’m a believer in accountability so let me share what I think is at the root of all this.
Three things. Firstly, the formal accountability frameworks we are currently subject to, while useful in ensuring compliance and attempting to provide a structured framework for evaluation, are no longer fit for purpose. Secondly, when accountability measures are manipulated for political ends, their effectiveness is compromised, and this is where we are currently at. Instead of promoting transparency and improvement, they can become a tool for advancing a political agenda. This undermines the credibility of the measure, erodes trust, and detracts from the intended purpose of fostering genuine accountability and organisational enhancement. Thirdly, there are just too many questions about the effectiveness and how fit for purpose the very organisations and regulators tasked with holding us to account are. Accountability becomes unattainable without faith in the regulator overseeing the process, trust is the linchpin as it underpins confidence in the fairness, impartiality, and competence of the oversight mechanism. When trust erodes, as I believe it has, the accountability framework falters, impeding the willingness of individuals and organisations to accept responsibility for their actions and hindering the credibility of the regulatory process.
Here’s a couple of reasons why I’ve come to this conclusion.
Firstly, current formal accountability measures have not kept pace with emerging challenges, societal changes, or technological advancements. So many of the issues we are currently seeking to address fall outside the scope of existing accountability frameworks. We have just been through a dramatic and traumatic upheaval in education, and we are still in flux, and post pandemic there are some huge issues for us to address; how inclusive we are in our practices in welcoming all pupils into our schools, the crisis in SEND that is enveloping us, the societal challenges over diversity and equality, the very real challenges with attendance that all schools face. And on. These are the things we should be held accountable for, but I don’t believe we are other than in a very superficial way. Frankly, the current Ofsted framework is not sophisticated enough to adequately evaluate our impact on these big issues and that is because it relies on a limited set of metrics and KPIs to assess performance. The current indicators are too narrow and fail to capture the complexity of the task at hand. Somewhere, someone in charge of holding us to account has not woken up to the fact that the purpose of education has changed.
“So many of the issues we are currently seeking to address fall outside the scope of existing accountability frameworks. We have just been through a dramatic and traumatic upheaval in education, and we are still in flux”
Secondly, a real weakness of accountability measures as they stand is that those who have most invested in how good we are at what we do, the most to gain and the most to lose, have least formal input into deciding how well we are doing. Current methodologies fail to meaningfully capture a broad range of stakeholder perspectives. The only real way in which our stakeholder’s views get heard formally, and thus used to hold us to account, (I know most of us do this all the time as part of our everyday practices) is if parents fill in an Ofsted questionnaire every few years or make a complaint to one of the relevant regulatory bodies. This is too one dimensional and crude. There is insufficient input from the communities we serve, our children, our families, our employees, and other relevant groups to accurately reflect the broader impact of our school or trust’s work. Parents and other stakeholders are not empowered by this. They are disenfranchised.
There are lots of other issues I could focus on; how the current system encourages short termism in school improvement, sometimes leads to gaming and manipulation etc. but the first argument alone is enough for me to say it’s time for a refresh in how we are held to account.
So what might a makeover look like?
I’m going to start with the need for a more holistic approach to accountability. Something I’ve always believed would be a good idea is to separate what I earlier called ‘organisational hygiene’ from core business. Separating accountability for aspects such as finances and safeguarding, from the core business, the quality of education etc, offers distinct advantages. Firstly, it allows for a more focused evaluation of each aspect, enabling specialised expertise in auditing financial practices or ensuring robust safeguarding procedures without diluting attention to educational excellence. In doing this, specialised bodies could concentrate on their specific domain, ensuring a thorough examination of financial transparency or safeguarding protocols. I think this should be frequent (annual?) and each aspect should have their own framework and accountability process carried out by a relevant specialist body. I believe this would place less of a burden on schools and would become ‘business as usual’ accountability much as we take audits in our stride. I think this is also relatively binary. Either we keep children safe, or we don’t, for example. Much better this is tested frequently, and any remedial action needed undertaken promptly. It’s a checks and balances approach and would lead to much greater regulatory compliance, early intervention and sustained best practice, I believe.
“Separating accountability for aspects such as finances and safeguarding, from the core business, the quality of education etc, offers distinct advantages.”
This, of course would then mean other accountability activity; Ofsted inspections for example, could undertake a deeper and more meaningful examination of how well we are fulfilling our core mission. And here’s where I think the path to redemption lies. The purpose of education is so much wider than current accountability frameworks would have us deliver. They only measure a small part of what we need to be doing if we are truly to serve our communities and fulfil our broader societal obligations.
So in addition, of course, to educational attainment and progress, pupil well-being and personal development, why don’t we start thinking more comprehensively about being held accountable to things that matter just as much? Social justice for example. How about integrating a trust’s commitment and actions towards promoting social justice into accountability metrics; evaluating how well we reduce educational disparities and promote equity. Looking at implementation of programmes addressing social justice issues, initiatives to create an inclusive curriculum reflecting diverse perspectives, and efforts to ensure equal opportunities for all students. How about environmental sustainability issues? Let’s look at the implementation of sustainable practices within our facilities and the integration of environmental education into our curriculums. And even how well as organisations we reduce our carbon footprint and promote environmental stewardship. If we truly want to be servant leaders let’s look at the quality of partnerships we have with our local community and local organisations. How well we facilitate or participate in community service and outreach programmes. How links to cultural and arts organisations are used to enrich the educational experience. The effectiveness of joint initiatives with healthcare providers or social services to enhance community well-being, the types of collaborative projects with local businesses, government agencies, and non-profits to show we are centred in our communities. Diversity and inclusion? How about metrics tracking demographic data on student and staff populations, ensuring representation aligns with diverse backgrounds or evaluating the promotion of a safe and inclusive school environment, coupled with feedback mechanisms, to provide a comprehensive view of a trust’s commitment to fostering diversity.
I know, I know, some of you will be thinking ‘he really has gone down a rabbit hole.’ And I share the above more to provoke thinking about what might be than any realistic expectation that we’ll get anywhere near that in the very near future. That said, as I have always been an advocate of within my blogs and the wider work with trust leaders, even if the national landscape doesn’t change (or takes a long time in doing so), there is much we can do for ourselves. So, part of the accountability debate needs to also centre around our own roles, efficacy and influence as much as national frameworks and how the ‘powers that be’ measure.
But if we are to accept that we are going to be held to account and indeed have accountability frameworks, let’s at least embed what truly matters within them. Locally and as a professional, we can begin to shape this together and again, we come back to the power and potential of Forum Strategy’s pure accountability concept. And let’s also continue to make our case for national change to those in positions of power and influence but let’s also not forget our power as trust leaders to shape accountability ourselves locally. Let’s be held to account for the real purpose of education.
Further resources and thinking around accountability can be found below:
In Practice Guide: Pure Accountability (2024)
Trust Accountability: Developing Your Trust Annual Report
A trust at the heart of its community – Batley Multi-Academy Trust
