๐๐ซ๐ฃ๐๐ฅ๐๐๐ก๐๐ ๐๐ก๐๐๐ก๐๐๐ฆ ๐๐ซ๐ฃ๐๐ฅ๐ง๐๐ฆ๐
A Case Study by Dr. Sekar Srinivasan, UN Educationist
๐๐ก๐ง๐ฅ๐ข๐๐จ๐๐ง๐๐ข๐ก
Two years ago, I spent fifteen days in my ancestral home in Tanjore district. The place is neither a rural village nor a developed town. A close relative of mine runs a CBSE school there, serving nearly 1,500 students from Kindergarten to Class XII, with around 50 teaching staff, 30 non-teaching staff, and several drivers, under the leadership of a Principal and two Vice-Principals.
The school has 6 acres of land, spacious playgrounds, and a reputation for sound administration. Parent satisfaction was high, and student enrollment was steadily increasing.
๐ง๐๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ฆ๐๐ง
During my stay, my uncle—who serves as Correspondent and Secretary—invited me to visit the school and interact with staff. The welcome was warm and transparent, with staff and leadership showing genuine openness.
After introductions and an informal session, I was asked to deliver a motivational address. The Principal suggested I speak to students of Classes IX to XII on “Challenges in Contemporary Education with Special Focus on Higher Education and Research.”
What followed was remarkable: the students were curious, well-mannered, and highly receptive. The Q&A session extended for over an hour, with students asking purposeful, optimistic, and fearless questions. Teachers and management later remarked that in the twelve years since the school became a Senior Secondary institution, they had never witnessed such engaged student participation. This affirmed my belief that today’s students are wise, pragmatic, and eager for adaptive mentorship and personal recognition.
๐ง๐๐๐๐๐๐ฅ๐ฆ' ๐๐ข๐ก๐๐๐ฅ๐ก๐ฆ
Later, during lunch with the Principal and senior teachers, the conversation shifted to quality control in education. One teacher expressed:
> “We are happy here, but how can we achieve supreme educational standards comparable to city-based institutions? Where do we lag? How do we evaluate our capabilities to build an outstanding institution?”
I appreciated this honesty. In the afternoon, I conducted another interactive session with the teachers and shared a self-assessment framework that could serve as an annual academic audit tool. I emphasized two key points:
1.With existing infrastructure and dedication, they could achieve 100% pass results, but to nurture “cream” performers, targeted interventions were required.
2.Self-assessment of staff, done sincerely and scientifically, would enable the Principal to prepare confidential reports that guide institutional growth.
I provided them with an assessment tool (questionnaire, evaluation matrix, and interpretation chart), which I had previously developed and refined during my career as Teacher, Principal, and Administrator.
๐ข๐จ๐ง๐๐ข๐ ๐
Nine months later, I received an invitation from the Principal. With joy, she shared that the self-assessment tool had helped staff identify weaknesses, remove hindrances, and improve work style. The result was visible transformation in commitment, reporting, and morale.
They quoted from Thirukkural to express their gratitude:
“เฎคிเฎฃைเฎค்เฎคுเฎฃை เฎจเฎฉ்เฎฑி เฎெเฎฏிเฎฉுเฎฎ் เฎชเฎฉைเฎค்เฎคுเฎฉைเฎฏாเฎฏ்
เฎொเฎณ்เฎตเฎฐ் เฎชเฎฏเฎฉ் เฎคெเฎฐிเฎตாเฎฐ்”
(Even a small act of help, when done in the right spirit, yields results as great as a palm tree’s shade.)
“เฎாเฎฒเฎค்เฎคிเฎฉாเฎฒ் เฎெเฎฏ்เฎค เฎเฎคเฎตி เฎเฎฐுเฎตเฎฐ்เฎ்เฎு
เฎாเฎฒเฎค்เฎคிเฎฉ் เฎฎாเฎฉเฎช் เฎชெเฎฐிเฎคு”
(Help rendered at the right time is greater than the world itself.)
This affirmation of timely guidance and adaptive change assured me that the institution was on a promising path.
๐ฅ๐๐๐๐๐๐ง๐๐ข๐ก
My long innings in education—as Teacher, Principal, Administrator, and Researcher—have convinced me of one truth: experience enhances expertise. The tools and strategies I once tested in my own institutions are now providing solutions to other stakeholders in education.
Hence, I share this case study, along with the Assessment Toolkit in the annexures, and invite your feedback, queries, and reflections at:
๐ฉ physicssekar2020@gmail.com
๐๐ก๐ก๐๐ซ๐จ๐ฅ๐๐ฆ
๐๐ก๐ก๐๐ซ๐จ๐ฅ๐ ๐ญ Questionnaire (120 Items)
Instructions:
Time allowed: 20 minutes.
Record your answers honestly.
For each statement, tick ✅ if it is generally true or symptomatic of your institution. If not, leave it blank.
Statements:
1. This institution seems to take unqualified staff a lot of time.
2. No one knows exactly who is responsible for what.
3. We have lots of problems—but no one really seems to know what causes them.
4. There are plenty of skilled people around, but people’s skills rarely match the demands of the job.
5. People don’t seem really committed to their jobs; there are too many clock-watchers.
6. Good ideas are seldom taken seriously.
7. Each department or division seems to be a separate empire.
8. Heads seem to believe that people only come to work for the money.
9. There seems to be no clear succession planning for vital posts.
10. We plan for tomorrow rather than for the future.
11. There is a lot of disagreement about pay.
12. People make mistakes—but they don’t seem to learn from them.
13. New people take far too long to reach an acceptable level of work performance.
14. Jobs are not clearly defined.
15. I don’t see much evidence of delegation.
16. Seniors don’t have the time to train people.
17. Performance won’t improve since there are no real incentives to do it.
18. Lateral thinking cuts no ice around here.
19. I wish groups would get together more to solve common problems.
20. Heads equate tight supervision and control with better results.
21. New Heads are usually recruited externally.
22. I don’t really know what’s expected of me.
23. People often leave to earn more elsewhere.
24. People will avoid even constructive criticism.
25. The qualifications of job applicants seem to be getting lower every time.
26. Our internal organization definitely needs updating.
27. Important decisions are exclusively the province of top management.
28. Training is valued highly by some departments and ignored by others.
29. People are more likely to get disciplined than praised.
30. If only we took more risks.
31. I just wish people would say what they really think.
32. Administrators believe that people are fundamentally lazy.
33. There is no development plan for the future.
34. Staff are told one thing and judged by another.
35. Not rocking the boat seems to bring the best rewards.
36. People are set in their ways and seem comfortable with that.
37. New people don’t stay.
38. The various parts of this institution all seem to be ploughing their own furrow.
39. There is talent around—but it’s not channelled properly.
40. Skills tend to be picked up almost accidentally rather than being learnt properly.
41. People put in a lot of effort, but the institution exploits that without reward.
42. Innovation is not valued.
43. Under pressure, everyone looks after themselves first.
44. There’s resentment among some about the “good old days” when discipline was stricter.
45. Administration feels threatened by potential high achievers.
46. There is often a mismatch between external and individual objectives.
47. The pay structure is an obstacle to efficiency.
48. Time and energy are not channelled properly.
49. Many staff are only barely up to scratch.
50. The top dog has too much on her/his plate to keep in touch with everything.
51. Decision making is hampered by lack of timely information.
52. Many seniors feel others should learn “the hard way” as they did.
53. Good performance is not valued.
54. Other schools seem to have all the bright ideas.
55. Heads guard their turf and resist cooperation.
56. Heads seldom see staff as contributors to school success.
57. People don’t know what the institution plans to do with them.
58. People are judged more on personality than ability.
59. Exceptional effort tends not to be rewarded.
60. When the going gets tough, too many people opt out.
61. New people seem to get the better jobs—causing resentment.
62. Some departments seem overstaffed relative to their output.
63. Old ideas dominate.
64. Heads are poor at training their staff.
65. If the school were in trouble, most heads would care little and do less.
66. Custom and practice are seldom challenged.
67. Meetings are unproductive.
68. Management doesn’t care whether staff are happy at work.
69. Too many variables prevent succession planning.
70. The school’s future plans are weak.
71. We don’t pay enough to attract really good staff.
72. Directness and openness are alien concepts to senior staff.
73. We just don’t have the talent we need.
74. Important things are often duplicated—or not done at all.
75. We don’t know our labour turnover figures.
76. With better skills we could increase productivity.
77. I feel like a lone crusader at times.
78. This institution is living in the past.
79. We don’t learn from others’ mistakes.
80. Jobs are not made interesting and meaningful.
81. We lose well-trained staff to other institutions.
82. Objectives are vague to the point of being meaningless.
83. Staff rely on long hours just to make ends meet.
84. We need more challenge to the accepted order.
85. We recruit people with little or no talent.
86. Workload balance is poor—some overworked, others idle.
87. We don’t know how our pay compares to others.
88. There is no encouragement to update skills.
89. Staff lack a voice in influencing things.
90. People keep their hands down in meetings.
91. In-fighting is destructive.
92. Heads don’t care about staff work quality.
93. Senior management experience is too narrow.
94. Priorities are unclear.
95. People feel they work for a second-class institution.
96. Standards are too low.
97. Recruitment brings in weak candidates.
98. Reorganization is taboo.
99. Management information doesn’t reach the right places.
100. With better quality staff, we’d produce better results.
101. Staff are unhappy with low pay compared to peers.
102. Heads aren’t alert to curriculum change.
103. People don’t care about colleagues.
104. Relationships with heads are too formal.
105. Many doubt the value of management education.
106. Plans are made in ivory towers.
107. Benefits don’t compare to other schools.
108. Strong individuals are resented.
109. Recruitment is inconsistent—left to individual heads.
110. Departments criticize each other destructively.
111. Management ignores the cost of unhappy staff.
112. Staff treatment in the first days is poor.
113. Jobs lack challenge.
114. Problems are pushed under the carpet.
115. Teams rarely do team-building.
116. In-fighting between heads is common.
117. Heads are vague about staff prospects.
118. Decisions are made too late.
119. I know I am underpaid.
120. No one here is stretched enough.
๐๐ก๐ก๐๐ซ๐จ๐ฅ๐ ๐ฎ: Evaluation Matrix
The 120 questions correspond to a 12×10 grid (A–L, 1–10).
Tick ✅ the box for every statement that applies.
Count totals per column.
๐๐ก๐ก๐๐ซ๐จ๐ฅ๐ ๐ฏ: Interpretation Chart
Column Blockage Area
A Inadequate recruitment policy/procedure
B Confused organizational structure
C Inadequate management control
D Poor training
E Low levels of motivation
F Low levels of creativity
G Poor teamwork
H Management philosophy causing problems
I No succession planning/management development
J Aims unclear
K Reward system unfair
L Personal stagnation
๐๐ก๐ง๐๐ฅ๐ฃ๐ฅ๐๐ง๐๐ง๐๐ข๐ก
The higher the score in a column, the more urgent that problem area is.
These blockages must be investigated and addressed through planning, policy, and capacity building.
๐๐๐ฆ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ฅ
This tool was first introduced to me during my MBA studies and has been adapted for educational research purposes. It is shared here for institutional improvement and reflection—not for commercialization.
Dr. Sekar Srinivasan
M.Sc., M.Ed., M.Phil., Ph.D., D.Sc., M.B.A.
UN Educationist
Comments
Post a Comment