Woods Academy HOS departure?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Different school.
Woods hos has given plenty of notice.

As pp explained, that is actually not true. The Woods BOT is behind the eight ball with their search.

How far in advance is someone supposed to give notice?
I’ve only ever given 2 weeks. This is nearly a year.

Shh, your ignorance is showing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Different school.
Woods hos has given plenty of notice.

As pp explained, that is actually not true. The Woods BOT is behind the eight ball with their search.

How far in advance is someone supposed to give notice?
I’ve only ever given 2 weeks. This is nearly a year.

Shh, your ignorance is showing.

DP. Comments like that show your ignorance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Different school.
Woods hos has given plenty of notice.

As pp explained, that is actually not true. The Woods BOT is behind the eight ball with their search.

How far in advance is someone supposed to give notice?
I’ve only ever given 2 weeks. This is nearly a year.

In independent schools, when a head of school announces his or her departure, best standard practice is 18 months. It is an entirely different animal from other types of jobs that you might have personal experience with. As pp stated, look at Maret and St Patrick’s as recent examples.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Different school.
Woods hos has given plenty of notice.

As pp explained, that is actually not true. The Woods BOT is behind the eight ball with their search.

How far in advance is someone supposed to give notice?
I’ve only ever given 2 weeks. This is nearly a year.

Shh, your ignorance is showing.

Shh, your assholiness is showing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Does anyone really care if there is an interim head for several months or even a year? This happens all the time at my company - people who give even lots of notice are replaced with the “acting” CFO or whatever until the new hire is finalized. Life goes on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Different school.
Woods hos has given plenty of notice.

As pp explained, that is actually not true. The Woods BOT is behind the eight ball with their search.

How far in advance is someone supposed to give notice?
I’ve only ever given 2 weeks. This is nearly a year.

In independent schools, when a head of school announces his or her departure, best standard practice is 18 months. It is an entirely different animal from other types of jobs that you might have personal experience with. As pp stated, look at Maret and St Patrick’s as recent examples.

No, it’s really not.

[Anonymous]

^^^ It may be different from some lower level job but it’s not “entirely” different from leadership positions (CEO, CFO, etc.) at a company.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Does anyone really care if there is an interim head for several months or even a year? This happens all the time at my company - people who give even lots of notice are replaced with the “acting” CFO or whatever until the new hire is finalized. Life goes on.

OP cares. Which is why they asked the question why the departure was announced now and not a year ago. Because a year ago would have been standard practice for an amicable departure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^^ It may be different from some lower level job but it’s not “entirely” different from leadership positions (CEO, CFO, etc.) at a company.

What are you talking about? PP said that personally they give 2 weeks notice in leaving a job, and my response was that a head of school position is different than jobs they might have personal experience with. So if you’re the pp who said they only give 2 weeks notice, do you have personal experience as a CEO or CFO and giving 2 weeks notice?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Does anyone really care if there is an interim head for several months or even a year? This happens all the time at my company - people who give even lots of notice are replaced with the “acting” CFO or whatever until the new hire is finalized. Life goes on.

OP cares. Which is why they asked the question why the departure was announced now and not a year ago. Because a year ago would have been standard practice for an amicable departure.

It’s not “standard” practice. It’s one practice and giving slightly less notice does not signal problems. It is so DCUM to be like “Well if Maret does it this way, then that’s the BEST practice.”

https://www.headsearch.org/basics-search-process.html

It is fine if your school does not meet this timing. Many schools have searches in the spring or summer, often announcing the next head of school in the fall of the year that the outgoing head of school is leaving. Some also announce searches during the school year that the outgoing head is leaving, often moving through a quicker search to great results. None of these approaches are “wrong,” and schools have experienced success with all of them. The first approach just ensures the broadest applicant pool.

Schools may also consider the interim head of school option if the timing does not feel right for whatever reason, including if the school is larger or particularly complex, or if the board feels it needs additional time to gain community insights, revisit the school’s strategic direction, create space following a long-term head, etc. Many schools look within for an interim head of school, often to an upper-level administrator who has been with the school for some time. Others hire an external interim head of school, sometimes for up to two or three years, depending on the school’s needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ It may be different from some lower level job but it’s not “entirely” different from leadership positions (CEO, CFO, etc.) at a company.

What are you talking about? PP said that personally they give 2 weeks notice in leaving a job, and my response was that a head of school position is different than jobs they might have personal experience with. So if you’re the pp who said they only give 2 weeks notice, do you have personal experience as a CEO or CFO and giving 2 weeks notice?

You said it was “entirely” different as if experience from other contexts was totally irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Does anyone really care if there is an interim head for several months or even a year? This happens all the time at my company - people who give even lots of notice are replaced with the “acting” CFO or whatever until the new hire is finalized. Life goes on.

OP cares. Which is why they asked the question why the departure was announced now and not a year ago. Because a year ago would have been standard practice for an amicable departure.

It’s not “standard” practice. It’s one practice and giving slightly less notice does not signal problems. It is so DCUM to be like “Well if Maret does it this way, then that’s the BEST practice.”

https://www.headsearch.org/basics-search-process.html

It is fine if your school does not meet this timing. Many schools have searches in the spring or summer, often announcing the next head of school in the fall of the year that the outgoing head of school is leaving. Some also announce searches during the school year that the outgoing head is leaving, often moving through a quicker search to great results. None of these approaches are “wrong,” and schools have experienced success with all of them. The first approach just ensures the broadest applicant pool.

Schools may also consider the interim head of school option if the timing does not feel right for whatever reason, including if the school is larger or particularly complex, or if the board feels it needs additional time to gain community insights, revisit the school’s strategic direction, create space following a long-term head, etc. Many schools look within for an interim head of school, often to an upper-level administrator who has been with the school for some time. Others hire an external interim head of school, sometimes for up to two or three years, depending on the school’s needs.

PP here. I’m no fan of Maret and I thought it was very strange that they did their hiring in the spring as opposed to this fall, after Talbott announced when she did. And I also mentioned St Patrick’s which you conveniently ignored. I’m sure I could find plenty of other examples.

Here’s a quote from the same article, which you also conveniently ignored: “Schools looking to optimize their search process will often announce an opening in the fall or winter almost 18 months before the start date.” Sounds like a recognition of standard practice to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ It may be different from some lower level job but it’s not “entirely” different from leadership positions (CEO, CFO, etc.) at a company.

What are you talking about? PP said that personally they give 2 weeks notice in leaving a job, and my response was that a head of school position is different than jobs they might have personal experience with. So if you’re the pp who said they only give 2 weeks notice, do you have personal experience as a CEO or CFO and giving 2 weeks notice?

You said it was “entirely” different as if experience from other contexts was totally irrelevant.

Entirely different from jobs they have personal experience with where they said they gave 2 weeks notice. Which it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Does anyone really care if there is an interim head for several months or even a year? This happens all the time at my company - people who give even lots of notice are replaced with the “acting” CFO or whatever until the new hire is finalized. Life goes on.

OP cares. Which is why they asked the question why the departure was announced now and not a year ago. Because a year ago would have been standard practice for an amicable departure.

It’s not “standard” practice. It’s one practice and giving slightly less notice does not signal problems. It is so DCUM to be like “Well if Maret does it this way, then that’s the BEST practice.”

https://www.headsearch.org/basics-search-process.html

It is fine if your school does not meet this timing. Many schools have searches in the spring or summer, often announcing the next head of school in the fall of the year that the outgoing head of school is leaving. Some also announce searches during the school year that the outgoing head is leaving, often moving through a quicker search to great results. None of these approaches are “wrong,” and schools have experienced success with all of them. The first approach just ensures the broadest applicant pool.

Schools may also consider the interim head of school option if the timing does not feel right for whatever reason, including if the school is larger or particularly complex, or if the board feels it needs additional time to gain community insights, revisit the school’s strategic direction, create space following a long-term head, etc. Many schools look within for an interim head of school, often to an upper-level administrator who has been with the school for some time. Others hire an external interim head of school, sometimes for up to two or three years, depending on the school’s needs.

PP here. I’m no fan of Maret and I thought it was very strange that they did their hiring in the spring as opposed to this fall, after Talbott announced when she did. And I also mentioned St Patrick’s which you conveniently ignored. I’m sure I could find plenty of other examples.

Here’s a quote from the same article, which you also conveniently ignored: “Schools looking to optimize their search process will often announce an opening in the fall or winter almost 18 months before the start date.” Sounds like a recognition of standard practice to me.

St. Patrick’s or insert-whatever-school-you-want, same point. It doesn’t sound like a standard practice to me. It sounds like the basic point that starting earlier gives you more time. There are a million other factors though that impact the timing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is giving plenty of notice. Went to one school where the headmaster gave notice right before school ended which gave no time to look for a new headmaster and had to fill it with a temporary one.

That head of school who “gave notice” right before school ended was almost certainly fired by their board.

Best practice advance notice is 18 months, not 8 or 9. Nine months requires the board to scramble to hire a consultant, create a committee, and get community feedback before even starting to identify candidates and do initial interviews. The “best” head candidates are interviewing in the fall, so those candidates may be off the board by the time Woods is ready. Woods may be behind the curve here and may end up deciding to have an interim head for a year.

The Board could have known the end of the school year. The public announcement doesn't mean he just gave notice.

You talking about Woods now? It doesn’t matter when he gave notice from my standpoint. But the public announcement and start of the head search process are late as compared to best practices. And unless Woods just has a terrible board, there’s no reason they wouldn’t have started that process—which necessarily includes announcing the head’s departure—as soon as possible if they truly want a new head for July 2023, as opposed to interim.

Does anyone really care if there is an interim head for several months or even a year? This happens all the time at my company - people who give even lots of notice are replaced with the “acting” CFO or whatever until the new hire is finalized. Life goes on.

OP cares. Which is why they asked the question why the departure was announced now and not a year ago. Because a year ago would have been standard practice for an amicable departure.

It’s not “standard” practice. It’s one practice and giving slightly less notice does not signal problems. It is so DCUM to be like “Well if Maret does it this way, then that’s the BEST practice.”

https://www.headsearch.org/basics-search-process.html

It is fine if your school does not meet this timing. Many schools have searches in the spring or summer, often announcing the next head of school in the fall of the year that the outgoing head of school is leaving. Some also announce searches during the school year that the outgoing head is leaving, often moving through a quicker search to great results. None of these approaches are “wrong,” and schools have experienced success with all of them. The first approach just ensures the broadest applicant pool.

Schools may also consider the interim head of school option if the timing does not feel right for whatever reason, including if the school is larger or particularly complex, or if the board feels it needs additional time to gain community insights, revisit the school’s strategic direction, create space following a long-term head, etc. Many schools look within for an interim head of school, often to an upper-level administrator who has been with the school for some time. Others hire an external interim head of school, sometimes for up to two or three years, depending on the school’s needs.

PP here. I’m no fan of Maret and I thought it was very strange that they did their hiring in the spring as opposed to this fall, after Talbott announced when she did. And I also mentioned St Patrick’s which you conveniently ignored. I’m sure I could find plenty of other examples.

Here’s a quote from the same article, which you also conveniently ignored: “Schools looking to optimize their search process will often announce an opening in the fall or winter almost 18 months before the start date.” Sounds like a recognition of standard practice to me.

St. Patrick’s or insert-whatever-school-you-want, same point. It doesn’t sound like a standard practice to me. It sounds like the basic point that starting earlier gives you more time. There are a million other factors though that impact the timing.

Exactly. Including a less-than-amicable separation, or a board that doesn’t have its act together. Which brings us back to OP’s question…