Nearly two years ago, when I took on the role of principal, I inherited a leadership structure that looked good on paper: key stage leaders across the school, clearly aligned with our British curriculum framework and familiar to staff and students alike.
But within days I could feel it wasn’t working. Not because people were doing a bad job, but because the structure simply didn’t match the direction in which we needed to go. So midway through my first year, I set about implementing a plan to create a new system for the next academic year.
At the heart of this plan was replacing the key stage leadership model with a framework of assistant headteachers, each with a whole-school strategic focus: teaching and learning, wellbeing and enrichment.
The impact has been significant. We’ve launched a series of initiatives to enhance student voice, upskilled pastoral tutors and expanded support systems for our young people. Our recent Council of International Schools preparatory visit highlighted wellbeing as a major strength.
We’ve also worked to develop a contextually relevant learner profile, reshaping our approach to planning and how we assess student growth beyond the curriculum. Moreover, we have enhanced our use of data to drive targeted interventions and improved our colleague-to-colleague coaching programme.
Restructuring leadership in a school
None of this would have been possible without restructuring leadership. There is no doubt that this was a big decision - but if you are facing a similar crossroads, here are five key questions every school leader should ask to see if change is required.
1. Does the current leadership structure reflect your school’s strategic priorities?
Our key stage model had been in place for years, but it no longer supported what we had identified as central to our school’s direction - teaching and learning, wellbeing and enrichment.
These areas sat at the heart of our strategic plan, yet no one had clear, whole-school accountability for them. We needed leadership that enabled strategic ownership, not just operational oversight.
2. Are responsibilities fairly and sustainably distributed?
In our case, the size and complexity of key stages varied enormously. One leader was managing a sprawling section of the school with countless moving parts; another was overseeing a much smaller cohort.
The workload was unbalanced, and so was the scope for impact. Among our leaders there was a lack of awareness and appreciation of the complexities of their colleagues’ roles. Equity in leadership responsibilities matters - not only for wellbeing and effectiveness, but also for retention and professional trust.
3. Are lines of accountability and communication clear?
Ask yourself: if a parent, teacher or board member has a question about teaching quality, student wellbeing or curriculum development, do you know who is truly accountable? If the answer isn’t immediate, your structure may be muddying the waters.
Clear, functional lines of responsibility create confidence both internally and externally.
4. Does your current model give space to focus on what matters most?
A leadership structure should do more than delegate tasks - it should create the conditions for meaningful dialogue and strategic reflection.
Our old model left little time or space for leaders to step back and engage thoughtfully with teaching, learning or student development.
Restructuring allowed us to recentre leadership around our values, giving time to talk about what matters, challenge assumptions and align our actions with our ambitions.
5. Are you prepared to lead through the discomfort of change?
This is often the hardest question. Changing a structure means changing roles - and sometimes, people. We ran a fair and transparent recruitment process, but not all former key stage leaders moved into the new roles.
That created uncertainty and, understandably, some disappointment. Even with empathy and clear communication, restructuring can feel personal. But if you know your structure is holding the school back, delay only prolongs the discomfort.
Once the vision is in place and key stakeholders are aligned, you have to lead - not just manage - the transition.
A structure is more than a staffing chart
It’s easy to get caught up in titles and lines on an organisational chart. But real leadership structure is about clarity, alignment and enabling people to do their best work.
So, if you’re looking at your own leadership model and feeling that quiet discomfort - that sense that something isn’t quite right - don’t ignore it. Ask the questions that matter. And if the answers point towards change, don’t be afraid to make it happen.
Sam Gipson is principal of Kinabalu International School in Malaysian Borneo and chair of AIMS (Association of International Malaysian Schools)
For essential weekly intelligence on the international schools sector, sign up for the Tes International newsletter
