Management-speak: implications of research into the connections between management communication, school ethos and professional development observed in communities of educational practice in the secondary school sector.

Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Institute of Education, University of London, 5-8 September 2007

Dr Julia Ibbotson, School of Education, University of Derby

Context

In this paper, I explore the notion of “management speak”: the way that middle managers communicate with their teams which has become embedded in the expectations of the role of the middle manager. I examine the emerging commonalities in the way in which teachers in middle management roles in UK secondary schools (regarded here as “communities of educational practice”) share a linguistic repertoire. I look at the nature of these commonalities and suggest reasons for them. I also explore the differences between men and women in middle management in terms of their differing communications with their teams.

My research is based on the concept of the school-team of teacher practitioners as a community of practice (Eckert and McConnell-Ginet 1992, Lave and Wenger 1991, Bergvall 1999, Holmes and Meyerhoff 1999, Wenger 2002). Furthering the significance of this concept, I argue that the organisational culture and the linguistic repertoire of a “community of educational practice” (Hammersley 2004) reflect its values and ethos and that this can influence professional development.

The research project comprised an investigation into the language (linguistic devices) used by both men and women middle managers to their teams in their scheduled meetings. The research was carried out in four secondary schools in one midlands county of England and I was working within real managerial transactions. I looked at the differences and commonalities between the linguistic strategies of men and women in the middle managerial role, and the way in which those strategies reflect both management style and the organisational style (Hymes 1977, Arreman 2002, Baxter 2003). I explored the organisational culture of the four schools in which the meetings were located, in order to evaluate the ethos of the school culture as a community of practice and the use of linguistic strategies which represent that ethos. I selected two schools with female headteachers and two with male headteachers in order to explore comparisons.

Perceptions regarding the sociological reasons for gendered differences in management and communication style have been discussed extensively elsewhere (for example, Loden 1985, Shakeshaft 1989, Davidson and Cooper 1992, Tannen 1994) and it is not my intention in this paper to retread the same ground. In my research, I was interested in both the commonalities and the differences in gendered management linguistic repertoires and in exploring the commonalities in the light of the school ethos and the implications for professional development to middle and senior management roles.

It is, however, relevant to look at what differences there might be, at the linguistic reasons for gendered differences, and at the way in which linguistic strategies reflect school ethos. In my research, I used the postmodern social constructionist approach to gender as a social construct. I was particularly interested in exploring the communication process itself, in a specific context, that of middle managers’ team meetings in secondary schools. I was investigating what happens in these situations and what is significant about these events and processes, with specific reference to gender language and to the community of practice in which it is located. I was using a dialectical approach to linguistic theory, focusing on the role of context, pragmatic speech activity and the function (not form) of utterances in interactions.

Throughout the paper, I argue that communication processes are different for men and women because of their different “agendas” (frames and schema) as men and women, which they bring to the situation (Tannen 1994). I also argue that there are other repertoires which middle managers use, regardless of gender, but which arise from (a) the “agenda” of the middle manager role itself and (b) participation in the specific community of practice in which the management role is situated (Lave & Wenger 1991).

Theoretical perspectives

I explored published studies of gendered management style in a variety of managerial contexts as well as the specific context of the secondary school because I wanted a broad basis for comparison. I then explored the findings from studies of gendered linguistic traits in order to investigate whether there was a correlation between gendered management style and linguistic traits. A number of studies (for example, Loden 1985, Statham 1987, Shakeshaft 1989, Ozga 1993) have investigated gendered management style in different management contexts, not only that of educational management. A review of this research literature shows that a pattern emerges. This pattern relates closely to that identified by linguists investigating gendered language traits across a variety of social and management situations, and the pragmatic or semiotic context for them.

Ozga (1993) identified the feminine management style as “enabling”. In her collection of profiles and anecdotes, she drew out a pattern of skills associated with the women managers in her study. These were interpersonal and interactional skills: those associated with communication, with a sensitivity to people’s feelings and responses, and those motivated by a desire for consensus and unification, a desire for working towards common goals. Loden (1985) also identified a similar set of skills characterised by female managers. She identified interpersonal skills of listening, a concentration on empowering others not self, and an expertise in teamwork and participative management. Literature on gendered language use indicates that women use, for example, apologies, acceptance of correction, politeness forms, softeners (command and affective) and inclusive pronouns, which help to build rapport rather than competitiveness, whereas men tend to use passives, imperatives, strengtheners, statives and topic control which establish distance and stress status (Coates & Cameron 1989, Tannen 1994, Cameron 1997, Wodak 1997).

Ozga’s and Loden’s identification of characteristically feminine skills of management and communication need not necessarily preclude males: men might also positively value interpersonal skills and a desire for consensus. However, other studies indicated that men do tend to take a different slant from women on the choices they make in managerial and communicative repertoires. Statham (1987), for example, in her study of gender-based management, claimed that women tended to use a more task-engrossed, person-invested style, while men may use a more image-engrossed, autonomy-invested style. In other words, men and women bring a different agenda, or “frame and schema” (Tannen 1994) to their managerial interactions and this may affect their linguistic repertoires.

The notion of the community of practice as the context in which men and women’s management communications take place, moves the gender diversity issue to another level. The framework of the community of practice is useful here, the community being defined by the membership of the group and by those practices in which the membership engages as a joint enterprise, and in which gender is one of a number of diversities which impinge upon the group (Eckert and McConnell-Ginet 1992, Bergvall 1999, Holmes and Meyerhoff 1999, Wenger 2002). The speech community of the model (linguistic commonalities) essentially arises from a shared enterprise and involves a shared repertoire of joint resources for negotiating meaning. This shared context in my case studies could be grounded in membership of a number of communities from which identity could arise: gender, middle management, the school in which it is based, the school community focused on the headteacher’s management and linguistic style, and more.

I report on my research which leads me to argue that within the community of educational practice of secondary schools we can identify a form of “management-speak” which has specific linguistic significances. I argue that a community of educational practice within a particular secondary school and which is developed from a feminine management style and is reflected in linguistic strategies typifying the feminine end of the continuum (Cameron 1997, Wodak 1997) is more likely to be represented by team building, others-orientation and supportive practices (Statham 1987, Ozga 1993). One which is developed from a masculine management style and is reflected in linguistic strategies typifying the masculine end of the continuum is more likely to be represented by competitiveness, task-orientation, and individualistic practices.

Approach to the research methodology

My research methodology focused on case studies of four middle managers of both sexes in each of four secondary schools in one midlands county of England: in total eight men and eight women participants. As a non-participant observer I observed, audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed team meetings led by the middle managers in my sample. I focused on the following areas within the meetings: establishing status; critical incidents: handling the team/ dealing with conflict; and decision-making. I transcribed key critical sequences and using the framework of discourse analysis, and working within real managerial transactions, I investigated the commonalities and differences between the linguistic strategies of male and female middle managers, and the way in which those linguistic strategies reflect management style (Hymes 1977, Arreman 2002, Baxter 2003). At the same time, I investigated the organisational culture of the four schools in which the meetings were located, using content analysis of documents and semi-structured interviews with the head teacher, in order to analyse the ethos of the school culture in terms of a community of practice.

Findings

Patterns found in the management agenda and structures

The proportion of women within management headship/leadership roles, whether faculty (academic) or pastoral, was fairly constant between the four schools. The proportion of women within pastoral headship roles showed a greater variation between schools, with the two schools headed by male headteachers demonstrating the highest figure. The proportion of women in assistant management roles was fairly constant between three of the schools, but one, a female-headed school, showed a far higher proportion than the others.

Table 1: Comparative proportions of women within different management roles in the four schools.

school / % leadership roles given to women / % of these being pastoral roles / % pastoral management roles given to women / % assistant roles given to women
Male head / 32 / 62.5 / 71 / 56
Male head / 30 / 50 / 60 / 55
Female head / 27 / 25 / 50 / 77
Female head / 29 / 0 / 0 / 59

Clearly, in the schools with male headteachers, pastoral roles were more accessible to women as a means to management promotion than faculty (academic) roles, whereas in the schools with female headteachers faculty headships were more accessible. However, in all four schools the discrepancy between leadership and assistant roles was clearly marked, with only around 30% of leadership roles but 55%-77% of assistant roles going to women. Looking at the statistics the other way round, around 70% of the leadership roles went to men but only between 23% and 45% of assistant roles.

Content analysis of interviews with the headteachers of the four schools, and of the appropriate documents show that community of practice agendas varied between the four schools. The two schools led by female headteachers were characterised by an emphasis on team-building strategies, empowerment of staff, cooperative, collaborative and co-constructive activities. One of the schools led by a male headteacher overtly emphasised similar strategies and values, but in practice the opportunities for these were not in evidence. The final school led by a male headteacher was characterised by leadership from the top, competition, and by a suspicion of empowerment. The latter was also the school in which women had least access to faculty (academic) leadership roles; access to middle management being via the pastoral leadership or assistant route.

My investigation produced the conclusion that the community of practice agenda marked the highest incidence of feminine leadership, both pragmatically and philosophically, within the two schools with female headteachers; the lowest a school led by a male headteacher, and the most contradictory in practice and theory, a school led by a male headteacher.

A comparison of linguistic patterns between male and female managers: the literature and my case studies.

In comparing incidence of gender-based linguistic strategies suggested by the literature and previous studies, and those found in my case studies, I found a high level of correlation within the schools headed by male headteachers. However, there was less correlation within schools headed by female headteachers.

Table 2: comparison of linguistic strategies by gender between those found in the literature and those found in my case studies

NB. Those indicated are where usage is assessed as highly marked by a particular male and female manager, not the single use of the feature by any one person.

Functions reflecting gendered frame/schema (features found in the literature) / Gendered linguistic strategies (features found in the literature) / number of men in my study using specific feature / m/f headed school / number of women in my study using specific feature / m/f headed school
Masculine: own status reaffirmed, competition, dominance. Assertiveness, report style / Holding floor
Imperatives
Passive voice
Distancing / depersonalisation
Dismissals
Statives/ declaratives
Professional lexis
Strengtheners
Topic control
Negative interruptions/overlaps / 6
4
5
4
4
8
6
7
8
2 / 4m/2f
3m/1f
4m/1f
4m/0f
4m/0f
4m/4f
3m/3f
5m/2f
4m/4f
2m/0f / 0
0
0
0
0
8
6
4
8
0 / 4m/4f
3m/3f
2m/2f
4m/4f
Feminine: cooperation, consensus, building relationships, rapport, solidarity, support, facilitating others. / Empowerment of others
Supportive strategies
Organisation/business register
Summations
Active voice
Deflect conflicts
Apologies
Accept correction
Minimal responses
Politeness forms
Positive interruptions/overlaps
Softeners - commands
Softeners - affective tags
Epistemic modality – hedges,etc
Anecdotal evidence
Inclusive pronouns / 4
5
0
0
8
0
0
0
1
4
2
4
0
3
2
4 / 0m/4f
1m/3f
4m/4f
1m
0m/4f
1m/1f
1m/3f
2m/1f
1m/1f
2m/2f / 8
8
8
2
8
8
8
8
8
8
2
8
8
1
2
8 / 4m/4f
4m/4f
4m/4f
2m/0f
4m/4f
4m/4f
4m/4f
4m/4f
4m/4f
4m/4f
1m/1f
4m/4f
4m/4f
1m/0f
2m
4m/4f

Within schools headed by male headteachers, there is a marked correspondence between (a) the gendered linguistic strategies and functions outlined in the literature review and previous research, and (b) the strategies used by men and women managers which were identified in my data. The literature (for example, Coates & Cameron 1989, Tannen 1994, Cameron 1997, Wodak 1997) identifies a feminine style of language as using linguistic strategies for support, facilitation, and the empowerment of others, reflecting a feminine profile of co-operation, unity, building relationships and rapport. In my case studies all the female managers, in all schools, used strategies of empowerment, support, deflection of conflict, which help to build solidarity. They all used an organised/business-like register and an active voice, which help to build co-operation in task achievement. They all used apologies, acceptance of correction, politeness forms, softeners (command and affective) and inclusive pronouns, which help to build rapport rather than competitiveness. Male managers used the active voice, although five of the men (four of whom were located in male headed schools) used a high incidence of the passive voice also, thus indicating a masculine ability to utilise both registers. This was also the case within the female headed schools where male managers used a number of both male and female linguistic strategies.