Progressing Your Career

It is normal for any employee anywhere to look to advance their career, and British Council employees are certainly no different.  Most companies or organisations have reasonably clear career paths, and most employees can expect to make progress if they are committed and play their cards right. 

So how is the British Council different?  Well, the most important factor is that almost all managerial positions are based on what is called the competency based interview, which is basically a series of questions designed to test your development in specific skills areas.  That's fine as far as it goes.  However, importantly, no consideration is taken of you holistically.  For example, your years of service, your achievements, your contributions, etc, none of these will count.  It's simply how you handle the set of questions you get on the day that matters.  It's also possible to coach oneself up for these questions, as they tend be highly formulaic, as is so typical within the BC.  So what happens is that the most suitable candidates don't necessarily get the position.  It's more likely to be someone who is clever at handling that type of interview.

Incredibly, within the British Council, there is no management training.  Basically, managers pick up the job as they go along. It also means that teachers trying to move up the scale are often caught in a Catch 22 situation.  For example, a candidate might be asked, "Describe a time when you ...." relative to a management role.  However, if you've never been in such a role, how are you going to answer that question?  Most people either make something up or try to bluff their way through.  It also opens the door for teachers applying from outside the BC who have managed at other schools, because they can easily leapfrog you.  The reason this is of concern is because, as per usual, the British Council shows no loyalty to its own.  When I was with the BC, I saw so many managers come in from other schools, often bringing in a completely different corporate culture and associated values.

So what's the solution? Well, one obvious one would be simply to start giving proper management training courses, specifically tailored to the needs and values of the British Council.  That way, any teacher interested in progressing could do a course, such that when he or she then applies for a management role, he or she will be in a strong position and fully clued up.  It would also make it much easier for existing BC personnel to progress ahead of external candidates.  The other obvious improvement would be to expand the interview, so that any candidate is assessed holistically.

One would think that someone somewhere in the British Council's Human Resources department in London would be coming up with ideas like this and more. Sadly, however, this is not so.  The big shots in HR seem only to be concerned with recruiting big names for the upper echelons of the BC.  They seem completely unconcerned about the situation at ground level in teaching centres. And in many ways, this is the whole problem with the BC, in that the rot starts from the top.  It's that complete lack of interest and indifference toward the lot of the average teacher that personifies the British Council.

Let's hope the HR leaders in London can start doing something to justify their high salaries.

Cons - Part Two

So what are the downsides of working as a teacher for the British Council?  I'd divide my answer into two parts, the first being the workload, and the second the management culture within the organisation.  Ultimately, I would say the latter is the most important factor (see previous post)

In this post, let's quickly look at the workload or scheduling side of things. In the old days, most centres had relatively few contact hours, typically between 19 and 21, with only a few Young Learner classes.  This was a very manageable amount, and any teacher could really concentrate on upholding the BC ideals of quality classes, because you had time to prepare and weren't under the same kind of stress and pressure as some of the "factory line" schools.  A great example of this was in Japan, where lots of teachers in the Council had idyllic set ups, while teachers in the big conversation schools or Eikaiwa's, as they're locally known, like Shane and Nova, had hugely stressful schedules, and for a lot less pay.  This was a major reason why working for the BC was a kind of Holy Grail at the time, the early part of the millennium. 

However, around 2010, a new policy came into place, with the idea that funding from London would be decreased, and teaching centres would be expected to fund themselves. This resulted in most centres having to rationalise, since they were now basically expected to run as successful businesses.  Exactly how this fitted into the BC's status as a registered charity is unclear, for from this point on they certainly seem to be competing in the marketplace just like any other school, if they're weren't already.  One of the result of this has been that almost all centres now enforce the full 24 contact week.  The number of Young Learner classes has also increased massively over the last few years.  So a typical daily schedule might consist of a Kids class, followed by a Teens class and rounded off with an Adults class in the evening, by which time you'll already feel pretty whacked, if you're normal, that is.

Another feature that's gathered momentum over years is the LDP or Learning & Development Plan.  It's almost universally hated by all teachers as something completely useless and unnecessary.   Most teachers are already studying for a DELTA, CELTYL or even an MA, so the last thing they want is this extra workload to prove they're not wasting their time.  That, and innumerable in-house sessions, called INSETTs. 

Of course, you can argue that that is normal for most large companies or organisations.  Perhaps so.  Nevertheless, the overall effect has been to make working as a teacher for the BC a much more pressurised and stressful experience than it was in bygone times.  Be prepared!


 

Cons - Part One

The main downside of working for the British Council as a teacher sadly comes from the management itself.  The simple fact is that no one in the management hierarchy genuinely cares about you as an individual.  When you start any job with a new company or organisation, you might reasonably assume, or at least hope, that someone is following and taking an interest in your progress and development.  Unfortunately, this is not so within the British Council.  In fact, it is possible that the manager of your centre knows almost nothing about you, apart from scraps of information here and there.

To understand this anomaly, it is important to grasp how the British Council is structured.  One of the most significant features is that everyone on a global contract is expected to move on after four years.  What this does is to create a huge sense of impermanence and insecurity.  It's possible that you will start a new job, and then within a year a complete new management team will have taken over.  How can they possibly be expected to know about your contribution to date, other than some scant "handover notes" left by the departing manager?

What this system does is to create a culture in which everyone just looks after their own interests, without much concern for anyone else other than those in their immediate work orb.  This is particularly true of the senior managers.  They are almost all eyeing up their next position, and largely using the current one as fodder.  Almost all British Council managers seem to have this blinkered approach.  Why should they be overly concerned about any centre and the people there when they know they will be moving on in a couple of years?

In addition to this, your line manager will only be a senior teacher, a mere one level up from you.  He or she cannot reasonably be expected to take responsibility for your development.  For them, line managing you is simply a box ticking exercise.  You're basically just a job of work for them. Most of them are overworked anyway. And you can be sure that the centre manager will delegate as much work as possible to the line manager.  In fact, "see your line manager" has become a kind of mantra within the British Council.  To some extent it may be genuine delegation of duties, but more often than not the centre manager just doesn't want to be bothered and wants to be left alone to focus on more important matters than a mere teacher.

The net result is that most teachers fail to establish any kind of rapport with the senior management, which naturally leads to low morale and a feeling of frustration.  It's natural in any work environment that an employee wants to feel valued and recognised, but this is precisely what is missing in the British Council set up.  You have instead a management team that is not seriously interested in you, but only with overall figures and numbers. Remember, British Council Teaching Centres are now expected to be run as businesses.  You will rarely receive praise or recognition for any of your work, that's if they even know about it.

I'll go into more detail in future posts, particularly with regard to the lack of rapport between management and teachers, and the British Council's obsession with procedures rather than people, as well as their famous buck passing.  But, meanwhile, to sum up so far, you have a situation in which you may feel loyalty towards the British Council, but that feeling will certainly not be reciprocated.  You may do several years of service and make all kinds of valuable contributions, but if anything goes wrong you will be dropped like a hot brick.  Any teacher is fully dispensable, and no manager is likely to take more than a passing interest in you.  No one is ultimately responsible for you. 
 

Pros

Altogether I worked for seven years as a teacher with the British Council, so I feel I’m in a strong position to make a fairly objective assessment of their strengths and weaknesses.  The particular places I worked for them were Sri Lanka, Thailand and Bahrain.  I also had dealings with them in Japan, Saudi Arabia and Tanzania.

Probably the first thing anyone notices who walks into a British Council centre is how nicely appointed they are, clean and modern, usually with light spacious open plan lobbies and office areas, etc.  There's certainly nothing crampy about them, and they seem to have all the facilities you would expect a modern work place to have. That's always a big plus psychologically, to be working in such a comfortable, environmentally friendly place.  Additionally, British Council centres are usually located in the nicest areas of the city, whether they be residential or downtown.

Another important benefit of working with the British Council is the financial package, which is certainly one of the best within the EFL world.  Mind you, EFL teachers, wherever, are ludicrously underpaid relative to other professions.  The days of the backpacker EFL teacher are long gone.  Nowadays most EFL teachers are fully professionalised with Diplomas and even MAs, but pay still has not caught up properly to reflect their true status or worth.  The BC used to be the top payers. In fact, in the old days getting a job with them was a kind of Holy Grail.  But this no longer really holds true, and nowadays universities and institutes of higher education offer much better salaries. 

The full BUPA global health care coverage is another important pro, as is also the Pension scheme, which can be worth up to an extra 1800 GBP a year.  They also give very good financial support, such as flights and a settling in allowance of half a month’s salary.  Some centres even give an end of year bonus.  They may even pay for half of a DELTA, Trinity Diploma or MA course.  A final perk is that they nobly offer you special leave when appropriate, such as maternity leave or for when a family member has died. 

As far the actual teaching experience itself, the British Council are again at the forefront in terms of both the quality of their courses and the amenities.  For example, all classrooms have Promethean interactive smart boards, which are a huge boon to teachers.  And because the British Council goes back so far, there is a wealth of resources in practically every centre.  No teacher can complain that they don't have adequate support on the material front.  And, as mentioned above, the British Council will encourage you in the field of professional development and support you to get further qualifications, such as the CELTYL and DELTA, etc.

Another by no means unimportant advantage of being employed by the British Council is the travel possibilities it offers.  In fact, for some teachers that's the main perk.  Just look at my own list in the opening paragraph.  To actually live and work in cultures that one would normally have little access to is a fantastically exciting possibility.  It is usually younger, single teachers who are attracted by this.  It needs to be noted, though, that teachers with families and children may find the converse true, as changing country can also be highly disruptive and inconvenient.

The final, and possibly biggest, positive about working for the British Council, is simply that one meets some very nice people, mostly in the form of the other teachers. Generally, the EFL world is a nice, friendly, altruistic one and cooperation and mutual respect is the general feeling in the actual workplace between the teachers themselves.  The local staff also have always been incredibly easy to get on with everywhere I have worked.  Always really nice and helpful and keen to make friends.

So, as you can see, there are a huge number of pluses about working for the British Council.  They're a quality organisation almost any way you view them.  I would strongly recommend anyone to have a spell with them if they have a chance.  You will develop hugely as a teacher and gain reams of teaching experience.  And it looks good on your CV!

The first three or four years of your time with them will probably be reasonably golden. However, it's when you decide to commit yourself long term or try to move up the career ladder, that you might see and experience a different side of the organisation, particularly in relationship to the management. That's when doubts, uncertainty or even disillusionment may arise.  I'll take a look at these and other downsides in my next post.

 

Leadership

This post brings me to one of the most important aspects of the British Council management, as a lot of the other problems I have mentioned earlier flow from this. And, of course, by "leadership" I mean the almost complete absence of it!

When I was working for the British Council, I often used to wonder who I was actually working for in terms of real people.  Working for an abstract ideal, such as "The British Council", is all very well, but this is not enough to compensate for the absence of meaningful relationships at human level. Anyone looking up into the higher echelons of the BC will almost certainly perceive a void or at best shifting images.  First of all, those immediately above are continuously moving on, due to the BC's four year rotation policy.  You may start work in a teaching centre only to find that a completely new management team takes over a year or two later.  This creates a huge feeling of impermanence and a lack of commitment to anyone, in either direction.  How can you feel deep loyalty to a leadership that simply keeps changing?  No-one "above" can possibly be following or taking a sustained interest in your progress.

Really the rot starts right from the top.  For  a start, who are the Trustees, and what is their role?  Who even knows who they are?  However, most teachers working for the British Council do probably know that Ciaran Devane is the new Chief Executive, having taken over recently from Sir Martin Davidson earlier this year.  But this level of manager is in a world apart, completely removed from the realities of the regular teacher.  His main area of interest is the cultural liaisons with other countries, such that teaching centres can be little more than a side show for him.  Of more interest is who makes up the next strata or layer of management underneath him.  The place where real decision making starts. Again, I challenge anyone to be able to come up with even a single name. The BC is already faceless at that level.  After that, the next level is probably the regional heads and country directors.  Here we may be able to recognise a few people, but exactly who they are beholden to remains extremely unclear.  Where directives ultimately come from remains a mystery.  No teacher is ever given any kind of induction into the structure of the organisation. 

But so much for the macro view.  More significant is perhaps what might happen in an individual centre.  The main feature I noticed in almost all the centres I worked in was the lack of rapport between managers and teachers.  There was almost always a strong "us" and "them" feeling.  The example I particularly remember was working in a centre in the Gulf region, where the deputy teaching centre manager (DTCM) didn't once call me in for a one-to-one chat during the whole year I was there.  This kind of approach at best can only be neutral and at worst will directly alienate workers.  It certainly won't inspire anyone.  This was coupled with a strong top down authoritarian treatment by my line manager, who always sought to be a boss rather than a colleague.  He was always in opposition, full of his own agenda and what he wanted rather than what might actually be good for me.  Certainly never a friend.

In an earlier post I mentioned how very few managers know anything about their staff, and I suggested a "Know Your Teacher" campaign, together with a bi-annual meeting to help establish trust and confidence.  This way, any potential problems from either side could be nipped in the bud, and an atmosphere of trust and confidence established.   In addition to this, I also think it's important that all managers go on a compulsory management training course.  Believe it or not, this is not the case at present.  Basically, they are all untrained and picking up the job as they go along.  Also, a culture of allowing managers to show initiative needs to be established.  However, this needs to come from the top and filter down to the lower levels.  Interestingly, many companies now have a position called Talent Developer, which, in my opinion, would be an extremely useful addition to the BC's repertoire.  That way, someone would be pro-actively seeking out good practice and trying to channel it appropriately, rather than merely performing the current box ticking rituals most BC managers go through.

Let's hope something like this happens.

Ageism

The British Council claim to be an organisation that offers equal opportunities to everyone and practices no discrimination of any kind.  These are certainly very commendable ideals.  However, the reality in the workplace is often very different, particularly with regard to ageism.  And the British Council is no exception.

Most people would hope that as they got older the amount of respect they would get would increase.  It's a very natural human wish.  However, in reality, the opposite is often true, in that as we get older we find ourselves being increasingly marginalised, unless, of course, we have already attained a position of considerable power and influence. This is true particularly after the age of about 55.  Basically, if you haven't made it by then, you probably won't.

Of course, most ageism is not a conscious act of discrimination, but almost a law of nature.  Younger people always have and always will see older people as irrelevant to their goals, wants, needs, ideals and realities.  So it's quite natural this might extend to the workplace too.  If the dominant group are in or around their mid-thirties, as is typical in the British Council, older teachers may well get short changed in terms of their general treatment and opportunities for career advancement, senior positions being saved for younger teachers.  Although this may not be an intentional policy, and may be merely a subconscious process, it is nevertheless very real and frustrating for the recipients.  That is why the BC need more than just a passive non-discrimination policy.  They need to be positively proactive to make sure that older teachers get fair treatment.  A typical BC type of statement like "that wouldn't be fair on other teachers" (Krystine Joyce) just doesn't hold up.  Everyone is a unique individual with their own special needs.  Blanket statements such as the one above devalue our worth as human beings.  This also applies particularly to distinct categories of teacher, notably those over 50.

I myself experienced the full brunt of ageism on many occasions during my career with the BC.  The first time I noticed it was when I did my DELTA back in 2008.  I was one of the oldest people on the course and I noticed that I was consistently given a second rate treatment throughout.  It's well known that trainers are expected to fail a couple of people on the orientation course.  Cambridge try to avoid everyone passing, as they're keen to maintain their reputation for being tough and stringent.  Consequently, any trainer is looking for a couple of likely candidates to fail.  And who better than someone older?  It's so easy to present an older person as being not fully with it or being outdated in style and technique or just plain slow and cumbersome.  And indeed throughout the whole course I felt that I had been selected and was actually being groomed for failure.  I seemed to be passed over in almost every situation, practical or theoretical.  And, sure enough, I did duly receive a double fail.  In contrast, when I later switched to the Trinity, which is much more teacher friendly, I passed everything with flying colours and actually even got a couple of distinctions.

The event, though, that sticks out most in my mind was in Bahrain, when I applied for a coordinator position.  There were only three candidates, myself and two younger female teachers, both around the 30 mark.  I had been with the BC six years at that point and had even helped extensively in developing IELTS programmes.  I had also had my Trinity Diploma for over two years.  I was fully ripe to move up to the next level, but amazingly the job was offered to one of the two female teachers ahead of me.  Nice though she was, this lady hadn't even finished her first two year contract with the BC and had only just one month before completed her DELTA.   I can't actually prove it, but my gut feeling was that this was an age related decision.  They wanted someone younger and more malleable.  They simply didn't see me as someone they wanted to work with on their management team.

So what are the solutions to this kind of thing?  Well, I think the first is something I have mentioned in previous posts, that interviews need to be much more holistic, rather than being merely the competency based interview, which is far too easy to manipulate.  For example, I remember in my interview one of the managers giving me a ridiculously convoluted question, obviously designed to trip me up.  Secondly, the management needs proactively to encourage older people to take up management positions.  Usually they have so much more to offer in terms of experience and most importantly in people skills.  They can do this by advertising specifically to encourage that age group, and also by actually using line managers to suggest posts that would be suitable for them, i.e. really work energetically to get older teachers to apply for management posts.  Another way would also be to give them preference in the event of a tied interview.  There could also be special workshop sessions or events to highlight the value and contributions of senior personnel.  Finally, line managers for older teacher need to be chosen carefully.  Giving them hardliners 25 years their junior just isn't a good idea.  It needs to be someone who might be sensitive their overall life situation.  Mostly importantly, though, is that the BC needs to interview candidates in a proper holistic way, taking into account their overall strengths and achievements, as well as loyalty and commitment to the organisation.

It's extremely unlikely that any of this will happen, however.  In fact, on all my recent visits to the BC I have noticed just how few older teachers there are now.  If anything the BC seems to be moving towards a policy of youth first, presumably because they feel that kind of teacher is more marketable and more up to date with the latest technology.

To be honest, I think the British Council should abandon the notion that they are a fair and non-discriminatory organisation.  I would guess that it's because they're a registered charity that they still have to maintain those ideals, but in my opinion the teaching centres should no longer come under the charity umbrella, since they are now blatantly competing in the market place just like any other school and are only paying lip service to those ideals of non-discrimination.

Contracts and Legal Issues

Most teachers when they sign a contract probably don't even notice many of the legal features of their contracts.  Understandably, they're usually more concerned about their salaries and benefits, etc., and assume that there won't be any glitches in their employment.  And usually they're right.  Nevertheless, it's always unwise as a point of principle not to read any contract fully and properly before signing it. 

One of the most interesting features of British Council contracts for teachers is that they almost all are subject to the law of the country the teaching centre is in rather than UK law.  What this means is that if you do have a dispute with the British Council for any reason, it will have to be done in the local courts of the country you are or were employed in.  In my opinion, this is a clever device the BC use to avoid taking responsibility.  I'll explain below.

Firstly, there's simply the awkwardness and complexity of contesting in a foreign court or tribunal system.  Initially, there's the obvious problem of language, not to mention possibly completely different cultural values, as in Muslim states for example.  But, even more importantly, what if you have already left the country, as was my case?   Yet another point is what if your case spans two different centres, again exactly as it was in my case (Bahrain and Malaysia)?  Which court do you go to?  The sheer impracticality of bringing a sustained case against the BC leaves most potential complainants completely frustrated.

I feel this is particularly hypocritical of the BC, because anyone who works for them knows that there is almost complete uniformity across all centres with regard to values, standards, procedures and practices.  To all intents and purposes one teaching centre is pretty much like another, with exactly the same forms, procedures, structures and positions.  Even the contracts are worded the same.  Often even the same people.  The BC is clearly one organisation spanning several countries with the basic blueprint ultimately coming from London.  You can argue legal technicalities till you're blue in the face, but it won't change that basic truth at ground level. 

In my opinion, this truth should be reflected in any contract's jurisdiction, which should include London as well as the local courts.  This would enable anyone who felt they had a genuine grievance to choose and continue at their leisure, knowing they have the support of the home legal system to fall back on.  Ironically, it would also make it easier for the BC in the unlikely event that they themselves wanted to bring a case.

While on the subject of the BC as a global organisation, the BC now only recruits through their regional HQ.  For example, if you wanted to work in Thailand you would have to apply through Singapore.  They've been doing this for several years now.  To me this is more confirmation that the BC is one organisation and is becoming increasingly centralised, which again should be reflected in the contract's jurisdiction.  It's an incredibly grey area, and to me a contradictory one, in that the BC say they want local centres to be more autonomous, yet are shackling them with further centralisation.

Anyway, I certainly hope none of you readers will ever have occasion to be involved in a dispute, but if you are, do be warned how complex it will be.