Leadership should create trust in expertise

One of the things I enjoy most about writing this update is that people write back. And honestly, I feel honoured by that.

While preparing this update, I looked back at one of those replies. It came from Adrià, after an earlier update about leadership, ownership, and professional space.

He shared that he sees the value of leadership that gives teachers room to create meaningful experiences and actively participate in leadership itself. At the same time, he wondered how to manage the balance. In his words, a more sociocratic approach, where decisions are shared, may take longer, but often creates deeper ownership and belonging. Still, he also believes that in a school context, some decisions need to be made by the leadership team.

So his question was, in short:

Where is the balance between shared decision-making and clear leadership?

I think many school leaders know exactly why this question is so difficult. We want to give teachers more space. We want them to make decisions, show leadership, and take ownership beyond the formal leadership structure.

But then reality kicks in. Colleagues look at us when a decision needs to be made. Different people have different opinions. Some want more freedom. Others want more clarity. Some want to move fast. Others want to slow down. And when things become difficult, the expectation often returns to the formal leaders.

“Can you decide?”

I understand that expectation. Schools are not loose collections of independent professionals. They are communities with responsibilities. Someone has to guard the bigger picture, protect the shared Why, keep the How aligned, and take care of finances, accountability, communication, quality, and the connection to the wider system.

So yes, leadership matters.

But if every difficult moment ends with the formal leader making the decision, we shouldn’t be surprised when ownership stays where it has always been: at the top.

That is the pattern we need to break. Not by removing leadership. Not by turning every decision into a long shared process. Not by talking endlessly about every possible “what if”. But by creating a culture in which expertise is visible, trusted, and used.

For me, shared ownership does not mean everyone joins every conversation. It means the right expertise is trusted at the right moment.

That’s why I focus on creating teams in which people know each other well enough to recognise where different forms of expertise live.

You are strong in structure.
You sense tension in a group before others notice it.
You know how to talk to parents.
You can turn a vague idea into something practical.
You are good at external communication.
You guard quality.
You understand people management.
You see when a learner needs space, and when a learner needs direction.

Those are all forms of expertise. And they matter just as much as being the maths teacher, the Spanish teacher, the school leader, or the person with the formal title.

That is where distributed leadership begins for me.

When we as a team recognise your expertise, and you tell us that you can make something better tomorrow, we shouldn’t need a long discussion first. We need enough trust to say:

Try it.
Show us.
Let’s see what happens.

And if it works, we learn from it and copy it. If it doesn’t, we give feedback, adjust, and try again.

That sounds simple, but culturally it is a big shift. Many teams are used to discussing ideas until they feel safe enough to act. But often, that safety never really comes. The more we talk about what could go wrong, the easier it becomes to postpone action.

Sometimes we need to reverse the order. Not: discuss until everyone is certain. But: trust expertise, try something small, observe carefully, and reflect afterwards. 

For me, that is leadership that supports ongoing development.

The role of formal leaders then changes. Their job is not to be the smartest person in every conversation. Their job is to create a culture where the expertise in the room can lead when it should.

Sometimes that means the school leader leads. Sometimes the teacher with the strongest pedagogical insight leads. Sometimes the colleague who understands parents best leads. Sometimes the quiet team member who sees the relational undercurrent leads. Sometimes the person who knows the system, the schedule, the building, or the budget leads.

Leadership moves. And when it moves well, it strengthens the organisation.

Because people don’t only feel included. They feel needed. That is an important difference. Being needed means your expertise changes the next step.

And I think that is what many schools are looking for.

Not more shared talking.
Not stronger central control.
But a professional culture where people know each other well enough to trust each other’s expertise.

So maybe the question is not:

Should leadership be centralised or decentralised?

Maybe the better question is:

Do we know each other well enough to know who should lead right now?

Thanks again, Adrià, for the question.

And to everyone reading: if one of these updates sparks a thought, a question, or even some disagreement, feel free to send it back to me. You never know. It might become the start of the next one.

Let’s trust the expertise in the room,

Rob