In the last year the academy trust sector has – in my opinion – lost a little of its self-belief. Just a little.
Yet it shouldn’t have.
The creep started in 2021. There was talk then from some professional bodies of a need for trusts to follow a standardised national curriculum. A private member’s bill was introduced in parliament that, if it had become law (it didn’t), would have given Ofsted powers to create a national, one-size-fits-all, inspection framework for academy trusts. Trusts were told that RSCs would look to approve certain leadership appointments by boards. Those trusts being adaptable and using their freedoms to apply logic to remote learning rules during the pandemic, such as closing a week or two early for Christmas, were prevented from doing so.
The message was clear, you may be the experts, but we don’t completely trust you. That autonomy and freedom we talked about, well we didn’t completely mean it.
I remember writing in Schools Week ahead of Forum Strategy’s National CEO conference in September 2021 that the roll back of freedoms had begun. The belief that those earlier ambitious politicians and officials had in the power of the profession and the community to shape the sector was justified, but the philosophy seemed to be lost somewhere between the end of the Cameron government and the beginning of the Sunak one.
Imagine a government minister or an MP taking a similar approach with the medical or the legal profession, for example.
I’m afraid the last year, particularly the first few months of this new government reinforced this reduced belief. New government, same trend. The decision to remove funding for capacity building for those trusts expanding their successful school improvement models to support more schools, as well as the funding for converting schools to join trusts. The talk of an agnostic approach to school improvement models gave the impression of indifference to how the trusts model had over a decade generally made strides in generating shared vision, collective improvement, and professional generosity across so many schools. The decision to prescribe a one-size fits all national curriculum as so many trusts innovate and forge ahead in response to challenges such as technological developments, a shifting economy, and a need to enrich pupils’ access to the arts and opportunities for personal development, gave a sense of being overlooked.
Now, let’s be clear. We can’t change much of this. It is what it is, and to be fair to government, I think they’ve now begun to understand and acknowledge, far better than they did late last year, about what MATs do and how they achieve it through freedom. A government embraced with optimism and selfies, however, was soon exposed for not having done its homework on trusts or what impactful and capacity building education leadership for improvement really looks like. In my view they failed in their preparation.
“trusts across the sector are specialising and innovating in their own way”
There are many examples of where trusts are using budget, structure, expert people, strategic partnerships, and – circularly – freedom – to create and shape things that are game changing for our children and young people. These are things that are at the cutting edge
If we consider some of the major challenges and opportunities of our time, trusts across the sector are specialising and innovating in their own way – in areas such as SEND, wellbeing, technology and AI curriculum, environmental sustainability, and enriching and inspiring curriculum offers – including around the arts and enterprise. If trusts aren’t the experts in these areas, they can work and often do use their organisational and budgetary freedoms to work through networks and strategic partnerships with those that are, deploying ideas and collaborating locally, regionally, and at scale.
Some leaders will always let the government changes almost fully define their agenda and strategy. They will wait for the solutions from above. Those that never really got autonomy, for themselves or their professionals. Yet, government does not have fully formed solutions in many of the areas I’ve mentioned above, and the pace of change in society and the system is dramatic. The best trusts will and do look outwards, not simply upwards – sharing their expertise, and seeking and embracing learning and new ideas to address their vulnerabilities and blind spots.
“The future is here, it’s just not very well distributed yet.”
The system is moving forward, on some very big and profound issues. System leadership is alive and well. This is why I believe a designation of specialist trusts would be great for the system. It would highlight where the expertise sits, and would encourage and facilitate greater collaboration, when resources are tight and individual organisational bandwith is mostly taken up. In the words of William Gibson, “The future is here, it’s just not very well distributed yet.”
And this demands a collaborative mindset. I am reminded of the saying that ‘when the watering hole runs dry, some of the animals will look at the others rather differently.’ System leaders will overcome the temptation to hunker down, hoard, and protect for short-term solace when resources are tight. They will recognise that boldness comes through professional generosity and vulnerability – sharing ideas and successes with others, asking for help where necessary. This is a leadership superpower in 2025.
I think RISE teams are going to help, and I think they have some great people involved – it’s great to see so many different and credible people, with huge expertise on school improvement at scale taking on these roles. However, this is ultimately about supporting those in the most challenging situations, and ultimately it relies on government will to sustain. I think we need a genuinely system-led approach too, that sees trusts identified for specialist work and innovation, and to help each other manage change and ensure provision is responsive and at the cutting-edge in a world where pupils need the sector to be working together on high quality, responsive solutions. By enabling, but not managing this, government can reset its relationship with the trust sector overnight.
As for trusts, much of that depends on being realistic about the answers you don’t have, and asking others for help. It also means sharing those successful ideas and innovations you do have.
And if that makes leaders feel vulnerable, they’re doing something right. As Bene Brown tells us…
“Vulnerability is the birthplace of innovation, creativity and change.”
The article is based on Michael Pain’s speech to the Forum Strategy National #TrustLeaders networks on 5th June 2025.
Applications are currently open for the Being The CEO programme led by Michael Pain and Sir Steve Lancashire www.forumstrategy.org/beingtheceo
Other useful resources from Forum Strategy:
System leadership across the academy trust system and beyond
