The impact on home life and the difficulties of maintaining a work/life balance were a common theme. Many of the written comments within the questionnaire made mention of this. ‘My quality of life has declined significantly; I am now doing pointless paperwork till 10pm every night’ was a typical quote, whilst others talked about how they did not see their families during the week. Whilst these comments would not be uncommon for many lecturers, when allied to the changing perception of the role, the stress of the job became evident. This was summed up by one respondent:
I used to have a group of supportive colleagues but when I became a manager things changed. There is now an emotional distance from my colleagues. I am perceived as being ‘management’ and so I no longer have that support.
In short, and in echoes of themes discussed by Merrill (2009), the language used referred to a change of identity. This referred to how they viewed themselves (one person who answered the questionnaire repeated ‘I still see myself as a teacher’ several times in answer to separate questions) but also how others see them. This was eloquently expressed by another respondent who noted that ‘when I walk into the staffroom, all talk stops as I am now seen as a manager’.
This identification as a teacher was something that was taken up by Dave, a manager at a city-centre-based college that had been identified as ‘failing’ at its last Ofsted inspection. Dave described himself as a veteran of the sector and had managed a number of programmes with success and yet, throughout the interview, he constantly repeated the point that he was ‘just a teacher’. When challenged on it, his response indicated his desire to maintain that part of his self-identity:
I am still a teacher, I will always see myself as a teacher because that way I will always put the students first. As a manager, you get side- tracked into pointless activities that detract from the students. Frankly I only took the job because nobody else wanted it and I will never see myself as a manager.
Interestingly, this rigid approach to his job did not seem to impact on his skills as a manager. His students were positive about him and those working with him viewed him as a good manager. Whether this strong statement was designed to impress on the interviewer his credentials or whether it was designed to affirm to Dave himself that he will always be a teacher is difficult to deduce but it is clear that he viewed the
management part of the job, and the relevant KPIs, as something that was secondary to his main task.
This transition appears to be particularly challenging when managers are promoted from within. The move to management can be portrayed as a move to the ‘dark side’ (Thompson and Wolstencroft, 2013) and, as such, those making that move within the organisation they taught within were viewed differently once the change in role was confirmed. Beth was a typical example. Having worked in industry for many years, she started working at the local FE college as a lecturer on part-time courses in the evening. Her potential as a lecturer was spotted by the Head of Department and, over the course of 18 months, she transferred full-time from industry to education. After establishing herself as an ‘outstanding’ lecturer and an efficient course coordinator, she was asked to take a temporary secondment to a managerial post in a different department. After a few months, another vacancy opened up as a middle manager in her previous department. No interview took place for this role and so, within a few months of starting as a middle manager, she was managing colleagues that she used to work alongside in her department:
I was very naïve when I got the job and imagined that things wouldn’t change and looking back, in one sense, I wouldn’t have gone for the job. The problem I had was that I was promoted within the college in the department I was working with so the people I now line manage are people who knew me when I was an NQT [sic], who
mentored me and supported me through that process so they know me, and they know me on a personal level as well as professional level, so therefore I had the added dynamic that I had to alter their relationship with them and that has taken a few years to do. In hindsight, I should have taken on the role but with a team I didn’t know, so I could set out my stall.
Beth went on to describe the self-doubt and worry that affected her during the years it took her to redefine her relationship with the team she managed, and also the impact on her life outside the organisation. This included the breakdown of a relationship, problems dealing with the emotional aspects of the role and also stress-related medical problems. The problems that she experienced in making this change brought to mind the concept of the dark side of leadership (Jameson, 2006), which is often linked to the transition of roles. Whilst part of this is about the bullying culture that is sometimes present and the overarching imperative that is the achievement of the KPIs, another part focuses on the changes that management and leadership has on self-identity. Returning to Ecclestone’s assertion that a transition affects all parts of the life of the person making the transition
(Ecclestone, 2002), it seems as though Beth was ill prepared for the role that she was appointed for, despite the fact that, if you look at purely work-related criteria, she was an ideal candidate, being well liked, efficient, professional and experienced within the organisation. Beth’s experience can be contrasted with that of Tony, a manager at a high-performing college of further and higher education. Tony had remained with the same college throughout his career, rising through the ranks and approaching each position with a core set of beliefs that underpinned much of what he did and the vast majority of answers that he gave. Interestingly, his immediate line manager appeared to share the same beliefs, with Tony talking at length about this. He viewed learning as transformative and talked about his own background (he left school early and completed all his qualifications on a part-time basis) as an example:
I was very much against bringing in loans for students but in today’s society people are used to debt and learning is
transformative, it is definitely transformative and there are times in your life that you do something for yourself. I call it securing your future…We can change lives.
He then went on to talk about his day-to-day job. It consisted of both teaching and managing but within the first few seconds, it was clear which part was his priority:
It is a battle with funding and the SFA and we have to fight them. I battle to get what we want. We used to have wonderful Summer schools out there, we used to have queues into the distance, people from all of the community would come along and we can’t do that anymore, we used to have everything from guitar playing to academic subjects and it kept the community together. My purpose is to tell people this course is really good and it can change your life. I just look at myself, I was given the opportunity and I wouldn’t have the courage without the college supporting me – that is vital. I remember halfway through my course I realised that we weren’t doing Trade Union studies anymore, we weren’t doing politics and more, it was all about learning things, changing my view and opening my mind. This is what it is all about.
Tony then went on to talk at length about a number of his students whilst answering in very brief detail any question about his managerial role. It was quite clear where he felt his priority lay and it appeared that, thanks to the support of his immediate superior, he was able to continue with this approach. The contrast with Beth was interesting. Whilst Beth was very aware of the needs of a manager in FE and was clearly doing her very best to achieve the goals set for her, Tony, whilst not a natural rebel, was dismissive of them and focused on what he believed was important. The result was that the self-identity of the compliant manager was eroded and it became tied to the department, whilst the more rebellious manager appeared to survive (and indeed thrive) by focusing on his own beliefs and making far less effort to keep the needs of the organisation at the forefront of his thinking.