Each school Trust CEO is responsible for leading the Executive Team of the Trust that enables all the schools within the Trust to deliver the best possible pupil outcomes regardless of ability so each pupil is ready to become a model citizen contributing positively to the society in which we live. The CEO does this through providing high level inspirational strategic leadership and management across all aspects of the Trust's activities. The Board of Trustees set the Trust’s vision and strategy that the CEO is responsible for delivering through management oversight of all aspects of the Trust.
The MAT CEO role has continually evolved over the past 10 years, and as a result there is a significant disparity in how the CEO role is fulfilled across the educational sector. Maybe a CEO has to be a jack of all trades dependent upon the size and variety of schools in the MAT. However, the type of CEO role required is very much dependent upon the number and types of schools within the MAT. The CEO role of a MAT with a couple of small Primary schools will be significantly different from a CEO of a large Trust with a large number of Primary schools and Secondary schools.
An initial analysis of the different CEO roles identifies 3 different categories of CEO which I have classified as Hands on covering small Trusts; Hands off covering large Trusts and Hybrid covering Trusts that don’t fit into the Hand on or Hands off categories consistent with the phrase ‘horses for courses’.
The historic model of MAT evolution shows progression from Headteacher to MAT CEO within a small MAT, although even this requires a fundamental change in role and governance from what the Headteacher was used to. However the CEO, in this particular model is very well positioned to lead and direct each school in the Trust through a hands on school improvement approach.
However, as the Trust grows the number of schools in the MAT to the hybrid scenario, the CEO is unlikely to have the time required to provide the level of school improvement required across all the schools in the Trust. Furthermore, including different types of schools in the MAT further complicates the issue as the CEO is unlikely to have both Primary and Secondary school experience, so it would not be unusual to see outside expertise brought in to cover this. Furthermore, as the Trust moves towards the Hybrid scenario, the CEO’s role changes with more focus on management, coaching and leadership of Headteachers of schools in the MAT, which requires acceptance that delegation in these scenarios is required. Would the Hands on CEO be the right person to lead in the Hybrid MAT model? Perhaps the CEO is a chameleon with the ability to change characteristics as the MAT grows from the hands on model.
Exactly the same sets of questions arise when a MAT moves from a Hybrid model to a Hands off model. However, a hands off MAT’s CEO has a significant school volume issue that has to be considered. A CEO in a MAT, with say 40 schools, is unable to physically visit each school even once a month allowing half day at each school, so a totally different management model has to be adopted for Hands off MATs. Would a CEO in a Hands off MAT or a Hybrid MAT have the skills and experience to adapt accordingly to the new role’s demands given the fundamentally different characteristics and operation?
The 2 secondary schools that joined Frank Field Education Trust fit Lord Field’s vision for social justice in education as both schools have a significant portion of disadvantaged pupils from deprived areas. As a result, considerable hands on school support is required to ensure quality teaching and learning is provided at all times leading to improved pupil outcomes and this is being expertly led by the CEO who joined Frank Field Education Trust from an outstanding Secondary teaching school. As this hands on school support is an integral part of the CEO’s DNA would the individual want to be the CEO in a hands off MAT?
