Management Styles in the British Council

I've always been interested in different theories about leadership and management, so I thought it might be interesting to do a brief analysis of the British Council in relation to this.  There are many ways of approaching the issue of management.  However, one of the most effective and easy-to-understand is through the Blake Mouton Managerial Grid (below), as it lays out the different styles in a clear visual form. So it is using this that I will explain what I consider to be the main changes that have occurred within the British Council over the decades.

As you can see from the grid, there are two main criteria, concern for results or tasks and concern for people.  Obviously, both are very important. However, it's finding the appropriate balance for a particular context that is probably the key factor in producing the best outcome.  Different situations require different combinations.  For example, the army would almost certainly opt for the bottom right corner, using a strong directive managerial style, as time is at a premium.  A company in severe financial crisis might adopt a similar strategy, as results alone will be at the front of their minds.  However, most companies or organisations would probably opt for a more balanced approach in normal circumstances.

The British Council goes back a long way, actually being founded in 1934.  Teaching centres have sprung up at different times around the world ever since the 1950s.  However, we could take the 1970s or 1980s as our starting point in the modern era, as by then teaching centres were pretty widespread.  During these decades, the British Council offered high quality classes for predominantly upper middle class people, i.e. people with plenty of loot. Learning English with the British Council was definitely not for the masses, and was really more of a luxury pursuit for high class people.  Moreover, the BC was then still fully supported by the UK government. 

All of this was reflected in the management style of the Council then in that there was a distinct lack of urgency or concern for concrete results.  In addition, teachers were well paid with plenty of perks and given light work loads.  In fact, this era was probably the golden era from a teacher's point of view, since the management style was undoubtedly Country Club, as in the top left hand corner of the Blake Mouton grid, i.e. high concern for people but low concern for results.

From the 1990s the British Council Teaching Centres started to professionalise with a much clearer focus on results. This was particularly true from the mid 90s with the advent of IELTS and the need to provide courses.  Nevertheless, teachers' conditions remained very good, well above the industry average.  To get a job with the BC was still a kind of Holy Grail for EFL teachers.  Really at this stage we could say it was Middle of the Road management according to the Blake Mouton grid.

This situation probably lasted quite a few years into the new millennium, and may have lasted longer.  However, it was the momentous decision towards the end of the first decade to stop direct governmental funding of Teaching Centres that caused a major shift in managerial style.  Teaching Centres were to be run as businesses and be self-sufficient.  In fact, at time of writing 85% of the British Council's income comes from Teaching and Examination Centres. 

Thus anyone joining the Council after about 2010 will have noticed the much stricter type of management with a clear focus on results. In fact, taking the Blake Mouton Grid as our standard, the ball has now been firmly in the bottom right hand corner pretty much ever since. Manifestations of this new style have been seen in tougher teaching schedules, lagging salaries, reduced perks, and lack of appreciation from the management.  In fact, staff turnover has increased hugely during the period.

Well-Being in the British Council

Following on from my previous post, I've been taking a closer look at what Andrew Spells is doing. Certainly superficially it's great stuff. Here are the five main areas he puts forward as needing work on:

1. Improving support for staff in fragile states
2. Providing effective response for staff affected by crises
3. Improving policies and systems related to ill-health and absence
4. Promoting good physical and mental health
5. Improving line manager and HR support and understanding

All very commendable.  However, it's the fifth one I want to focus on, as that's the one that is most likely to affect regular teachers, who make up the group most likely to be suffering from low morale and a lack of well-being.

If you read my previous posts, you'll see that it's that complete lack of positive liaison between teachers and management that is the cause of the problem.   In all the centres I have worked in there has always been a strong sense of "us" and "them". In fact, in Thailand we used to refer to the area where the management sat as the "Dark Side".  Moreover, I have never worked in a centre where teacher morale was not low.  At least, not since about 2007.

The problem is much deeper than any Head of Well-Being in a remote office in London can solve.  The problem is the entire culture of the BC, which is based on applying procedures and is task orientated rather than people orientated. Almost all managers in the BC are career people thinking primarily about their own advancement.  Their main concern is numbers and figures rather than actual people.  That's how they will be judged.  Did they increase revenue?  Are student numbers up or down?  How fast has staff turnover been, etc?  As long as that is so, it does not matter how many directives come from above, the malaise will continue.

When I think back to my own case (see previous post) what I noticed was that my happiness was never even a factor. It was always simply about procedures.  This was true of all the managers I worked under - Krystine Joyce, Ian Shears, Sam Stevenson, James Martin to name just a few.  BC managers do not have proper training for managerial positions and are seriously short in people skills. Most would try to glass themselves off if they could.  They also rely on procedures because they fear making real decisions and the possibility of being held accountable.  You could be drowning in the river, and rather than pull you out, they would say "Have you seen your line manager?" So what the British Council needs to do is give proper management training courses with a large focus on the areas not only of developing people skills but also of taking responsibility.  In fact, they need to be empowered.

As things stand, Andrew Spells is precisely the kind of manager creating the problem.  He talks a great talk, but stumbles as soon as he has to walk.  Basically, he is just virtue signalling.  It's very easy to sit on high and proclaim that you care about your employees' well-being, but the real test is when you actually meet a person who is, let's say, distraught for some reason.  I know from my own experience that he was completely dismissive of my case despite overwhelming evidence that I was in a bad way and needed real support. The only "support" I got was to be put on a PIP (see my last post) with the possibility of dismissal.

An interesting idea that Mr Spells suggested was employee networks. A good idea, but it would still be monitored by the management. What is really needed is a completely open forum, in which it is also possible to be anonymous.  That way the management would get some idea of what teachers really think of them.  At present, it is impossible to speak candidly for fear of reprisal.  In fact, in the British Council it is considered a cardinal sin to say anything bad about anyone.  Obviously, outright abuse should not be tolerated, but candid, frank opinions should be valued, even if they are painful.

In one of my earlier posts I recommended managers being put on a "Know Your Teachers" programme, forcing them to take a serious interest in those working under them, to know their strengths, their backgrounds, ambitions, etc.  In so many centres the exact opposite is true. Ian Shears was a great example. He didn't speak to me once on a one to one basis until I left and always brushed me off with the mantric "see your line manager".

It's unlikely much will change in the British Council, particularly if Andrew Spells is at the helm,  In many ways, he represents everything that is wrong with the British Council.  Low morale and lack of well-being will continue, I'm sure.

Please do make comments.

Case Study 1 - Ian Shears

Much of what I have written previously has been generalised in nature, so I thought it might be an idea to actually give some specific examples of managers within the British Council.  The one that springs to my mind most readily is that of Ian Shears.  I am pleased to say that the British Council has now dispensed of his services and I congratulate them for that. Nevertheless, he typifies an attitude that many managers still within the BC have.

Ian Shears was the Deputy Centre Manager of the Bahrain Teaching Centre from around 2011 to 2013, maybe a bit longer.  But, actually, he was de facto the full manager, since the Country Director at that time basically handed the reins over to him, so he could focus on "more important" work.  While on that point, can anyone think of any worthwhile project the BC have done in the field of cultural relations? I challenge you to think of even one example.

The main feature of Ian Shears' tenure was his complete lack of interest in and indifference towards the teachers in the centre (his flock, so to speak). If he could have, I'm sure he would have glassed himself off completely.  I remember he made absolutely no effort to get to know me or find out anything about me and incredibly during the whole time I was there never even once spoke to me on a one-to-one basis. Until the day I actually handed in my notice, that is. Even then he didn't even ask me why I wanted to leave.

 

Ian Shears had for several years held positions of responsibility within the BC, including being a regional manager when based in Dubai.  As such, I felt he had become completely corrupted by that power, feeling largely untouchable and pretty well able to do whatever he wanted, without any fear of retribution or reprimand from above.  Basically, he rode rough-shod over all the main British Council values, such as valuing others or treating others equally.  He would simply apply his own agenda and values.  In other words, he represented himself rather than the British Council.  He practiced blatant favouritism and was loyal primarily to his management team, creating a strong "us and them" environment in relation to the teaching staff.  Importantly, he was the kind of guy who would happily throw someone under the bus to cover for any failure in his own duties. Let it be said, though, that this attitude is not uncommon amongst senior BC managers, almost all of whom have a "how do I get this off my table?" approach rather than a "how do I help?" one.

Occasionally, Ian would try to curry favour with the younger teachers in their 30s so that he seemed hip and with-it. He was very selective in this regard and demonstrated clear bias.  For example, he went to one of the younger teacher's farewell party (to look good), but of course didn't bother with similar events for older teachers like me.  Funnily, he even once claimed that he was "refreshingly approachable", which was actually something a teacher had said out of diplomacy at an early meeting.  Of course, he was following on from the android-like Krys Joyce, who had had an almost identical attitude and had successfully alienated almost all the teaching staff. So, maybe relatively he was more approachable to some.

The point about this is that it is extremely disheartening and disillusioning for a regular teacher to have a manager like that. You feel you are working in a vacuum with no one taking the slightest interest in your positive contribution or valuing you in any way. The only time you get noticed by this kind of manager is when you do something wrong or there is a complaint. And then all the cards will be stacked against you.

I mentioned in a previous post how he handled aspects of my situation. For example, I felt I was being victimised by my line manager Sam Stevenson, who had clearly taken a personal dislike to me and was set on "teaching me a lesson" for not kow-towing to him enough (another full story).  The point is that when I tried to bring up the subject of what I perceived as bullying, Ian Shears wouldn't hear anything of it, and again didn't even call me in for a one-to-one chat. In fact, he even copied Sam Stevenson in on the email, out of "courtesy" to the latter. Well, what about my right to confidentiality or some courtesy towards me? In fact, I realised later that he was probably complicit in what was Sam Stevenson was doing, and was almost certainly "managing me out of the organisation".  The evidence was ultimately a career-damning end of year report by Sam Stevenson which Ian Shears happily approved.

So when you've had this kind of treatment from a manager who makes absolutely no effort to establish any kind of positive rapport, and even does everything he can to diminish your worth, of course you're going to be disillusioned.  BC managers simply do not live up to the ideals of the organisation they work for. And, unfortunately, this type of manager abounds within the BC, which is why I recommend all teachers be ready and pre-hardened for this kind of experience. Never give your heart to the BC, but always maintain a mercenary attitude.  That will certainly be theirs towards you.

Summary

Hi Bloggers,

It's a long time since I've written anything about the British Council, probably because I've already made most of the comments I want to. So I thought I'd just give a brief summary or synopsis for the benefit of any teacher working there or thinking of joining.

What I would say is that it is certainly worth having a spell with the British Council. In fact, most people find the first two or three years with them reasonably golden. You'll be on a real upward learning curve in terms of your development as a teacher and will probably have a suitably deferential attitude at that stage. And make no mistake, you'll have some incredibly friendly, positive and helpful fellow teachers there. Also, the basic package combined with the perks is pretty good by EFL standards. You'll definitely feel you've moved up in the world. And, importantly, it looks great on your CV to have worked for the BC, as they're still a highly respected institution.

However, it's when you yourself have become a fully fledged teacher and try to move up the ladder that you'll notice the deficiencies of the management. Basically, no one will be following your progress or taking an interest in you. Think, who would that person be in the rotating world of BC personnel? The reality is that it's a world of androids mindlessly applying procedures rather than creatively taking an interest in employees. No manager seems to have any vision, ability to think outside the box or real leadership skills. More importantly, almost every manager in the BC is simply looking after their own corner and advancing their own career. Effectively, the British Council has become a "milch" cow for all concerned.

What you need to decide is whether you want to move into this world or not. Do you want to become one of them? My advice is to move on, as most teachers will find the numb world of British Council management extremely frustrating. There are much better opportunities out there now, notably in universities and schools that not only pay better but also offer better job satisfaction. Working for the Council is no longer the Holy Grail of EFL teaching.

In short, the British Council simply aren't the bunnies they once were. Standards have fallen on all fronts, whether it be in terms of the people working there, the heavy workloads or the diminishing benefits and remuneration. Move on!

Please do check out some of my earlier posts.

Good luck

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.

 

Valuing people

Hi Bloggers,

During my time at the British Council, "valuing people" was one of the main features of the British Council's overall vision and ethos.  We often had in house developmental sessions on this and other related virtues, such as creativity or mutuality.  I remember once even having a whole day devoted to it.  But the reality within the BC is that absolutely none of the managers actually care about it.  They only pay lip service to it.   It is only the teachers themselves who might practice it.  And I must say that the BC does have some excellent teachers.

It's a pity the same can't be said about the managers.  In my experience, most of them were completely indifferent.  If ever you had a problem or issue, it always felt like their attitude was "how can I get rid of you?" rather than "how can I help you?"  Their favourite line was "see your line manager", which effectively mounted to "don't bother me".  The real tell tale sign, though, was the complete lack of any follow-up.  There was never a "how are things now?" or "did you get that sorted?" etc.  Just the inevitable silence.  Once you'd been got rid of, that was it.  I always used to joke that if we could develop life-like androids, this is probably what they'd be like.

During almost all my time with the BC and particularly during my saga with the management in Bahrain in 2012 (see background), I remember I was at no stage treated like someone of value or worth. In fact, rather the opposite.  My line manager at the time, with the highly appropriate initials SS, seemed just hell bent on doing me down.  It was like he was out to "get" me.  I sometimes felt like I was in the police interrogation room having a confession beaten out of me.  He'd never accept my answers, usually implying that I was a liar.  And there were very few sessions with him in which I did not receive some sort of reprimand.  It was as if he felt it was a point of honour to do so.  God knows what kind of management training he had had.  Old school to say the least.  More suited to the military than a "caring" organisation.

So what I would suggest to the management is that they try genuinely to practice what they preach.  What they need to do is try to imagine how they would run a place if they actually owned as a private enterprise.  Their indifference to individual's circumstances and development would quickly become apparent.  As surely one of the golden rules of successful management is that a workforce that feels it is being recognised will perform better than one that doesn't.  Unfortunately, the penny doesn't yet seem to have dropped within the British Council.

As mentioned in one of my other posts. Managers need to know their teachers properly.  They need full dossiers on their achievements, strengths, what makes them tick.  Most importantly, though, they need to take an active interest, and towards this end I would suggest a bi-annual one to one meeting with teachers.  This is what would make teachers feel they are being noticed and recognised, and ultimately valued.  Teachers need to feel connected with the senior management, which is unfortunately something sadly missing now. 

Let's hope they see the light