Happy Friday Reader

I’m writing this from Shanghai Pudong, about to present at the NESSIC conference on leading effective change. Which is ironic timing, because I want to talk about conference networking and who we think looks like a leader.

We often select school leaders based on who’s comfortable at conference drinks receptions. Who speaks first in meetings. Who performs confidence in public spaces.

Research suggests we’re selecting for the wrong thing.

Back in 2002, Judge and colleagues looked at personality and leadership across 73 studies. The strongest predictor of who gets selected? Extraversion. The interesting thing is that extraversion predicts who emerges as a leader more strongly than it predicts who’s actually effective.

We’re good at spotting people who look like leaders. Whether they’re good at leading is different.

Even more interesting is that Koenig’s 2011 research found leadership stereotypes consistently read as masculine. The traits we associate with leadership (assertiveness, competitiveness, confidence) map onto traditionally masculine behaviour. Education does better than other sectors, but we’re not exempt.

This research is over a decade old. The patterns haven’t shifted.

I’ve been thinking about this because I catch myself doing it. When I picture “natural leaders” or people I’ve looked up to, there’s a pattern. Confident public speakers. Easy networkers. People comfortable being “on” all the time.

Yet some of the most effective leaders I know are nothing like this. They think before speaking. Build trust slowly. Find conference circuits exhausting. They get overlooked because they don’t fit what we expect leadership to look like.

We’ve built pathways into leadership around conference networking, speaking first in meetings, quick confident responses. Listening, reflection, building trust over time? Those don’t show up at a drinks reception.

If all your senior leaders have similar personalities, you’re probably selecting for type rather than quality.

The person who finds networking draining isn’t less capable. The educator who listens more than speaks might be exactly what your school needs. Thinking before responding isn’t lacking confidence, it’s being thoughtful.

I’m working to change how I notice leadership. It’s harder than I expected. These assumptions run deep.

When you think about leaders you admire or people you see as “natural leaders,” what pattern shows up? Who might you be overlooking?

Hit reply and tell me what you notice.

Shane