In a powerful career moment, Oren Marcktell heard a head of school at an ATLIS meeting cite his director of IT as his most trusted employee. No one else works with every person in the school, including students, the head said.
The encounter clarified Marcktell’s thinking about reporting structures for independent school tech leaders. “That makes complete sense,” realized Marcktell, IT director at the American School of Barcelona in Barcelona, Spain. “Why wouldn’t the head of school, who needs to have an ear on the ground for everything that’s happening, not turn for a trusted adviser to the person who has to work with everyone, from students to parents to teachers?”
While ATLIS members continue an ongoing debate on the merits of typical reporting structures, many agree that reporting directly to heads of school can position tech leaders as strategic players within institutions setting the highest educational standards and preparing their students for the future.
Earning Respect
Whenever Barry Kallmeyer, chief information officer at Hathaway Brown School in Shaker Heights, Ohio, discusses the questions surrounding reporting structure, he asks listeners, “Where does technology not connect in your school? Where is technology not being used?”
“It’s really hard for people to identify a place where technology doesn’t have a role,” he said. “My school’s new oven has Wi-Fi. Once people realize it is truly embedded in everything, they start to see that every part of the strategic plan in some way has a connection to technology.”
Perhaps reflecting that belief, the majority of independent school technology leaders, 61%, report to their heads of school, and 8% report to an associate head, according to Data and Analysis for School Leadership, collected for the National Association of Independent Schools. Plus, those serving on senior leadership teams earn $33,000 more than those who don’t, according to compensation benchmark data produced by ATLIS.
Still, a lingering 31% of tech leaders report to their chief financial officers, and that number is up from 16% in 2019. That’s less than ideal, say many tech leaders. Kallmeyer once held the position of Hathaway Brown’s director of academic technology, reporting directly to the head of school, while a separate director of network technology reported to the CFO. The bifurcation meant that “we were getting stuck on a lot of initiatives,” Kallmeyer said. Now, as chief information officer and a strategic player in his school, “the connection to the head of school makes so much sense because it’s a line to the mission.”
“Everything is structured around that,” he said. “Decisions should be made based on the mission and the strategic plan. It just makes sense. Our department should be making decisions that support what’s happening throughout the school for the benefit of our students.”
Knowing that the head of school’s decisions are equally steeped in the mission also helps mitigate the occasional disagreement, noted Kallmeyer. “It’s taking that moment sometimes to step back and think through the head of school’s decisions and say, ‘I get that,’ ” he said. “Sometimes, you’re so driven to get things done and to check off things on your list, but you have to take that time to reflect.”
Jason Curtis, director of technology and associate head of school at Thaden School in Bentonville, Arkansas, has worked in both circumstances, in positions where he reported to heads of school as well as CFOs. Reporting to a chief operating officer or CFO can tend to funnel technology matters and priorities to a head of school “through the lens of operations or the lens of finance,” he said.
In contrast, direct dialogue with the head of school allows the head to consider the pros and cons of proposed initiatives “independent of cost or operational impact,” before bringing in the CFO or COO to determine feasibility and launch negotiations.
“If you start with a cost analysis, it can tamp down innovation and prevent some really interesting things from happening,” Curtis said. “The cost analysis is an important part of the process, but it shouldn’t be the starting point. Heads of school sometimes will say, ‘This is a great idea. CFO, I hear you say we can’t do it. How can we make it happen? What can we change?’ There’s always give and take. There’s always horse-trading.”
Plus, even a tech-savvy CFO or COO who encourages and nurtures technology initiatives could resign and be replaced by a budget-focused naysayer. “Putting a structure in place that works regardless of who is in that post is much more effective than putting a structure in place that is completely dependent on who’s in those positions,” Curtis said.
In Barcelona, Marcktell reports to the assistant director in charge of operations but also has a seat at the leadership table, where he gets to “hear the conversations.” Plus, the head of school is open to direct feedback.
“Regardless of reporting structure, if you have a true open-door policy, that makes all the difference,” Marcktell said. When he does approach the head of school directly—usually if he needs to alert the head about a risk to the school—he is sure to inform his direct manager because “nobody likes surprises.”
In past jobs, Marcktell has reported to CFOs and, as Curtis noted, found himself in personality-dependent situations. There was the positive relationship with the CFO who had a tech background, and there was the “diametrically opposed” situation so untenable that he left after 18 months.
His advice for tech leaders being told to report to the CFO: “Run. Run for the hills.”
“One person, the CFO, wants to save money,” Marcktell said. “The other needs to spend money, and you’re never going to see eye to eye on anything, unless the CFO has technology experience. From my experience, it tends to be a very toxic relationship.”
Tech leaders who find themselves reporting to someone who always says no purely for money reasons should “find a better place to work,” agreed Sarah Hanawald, senior director at One Schoolhouse in Washington, D.C. In those situations, however, she doesn’t see a structural problem but instead the CFO’s failure to develop people and demonstrate leadership.
“If you’re at a school stuck with somebody who doesn’t take seriously your potential to contribute to the overall organization, that’s a bigger problem than whether technology has a seat at the table,” Hanawald said. “Somebody who’s really good at what they do needs to be somewhere where they’re valued for what they do.”
Tech leaders shouldn’t mistake their place on organizational charts as a measure of worth, she noted, but schools themselves “need to understand who they have and the capabilities of their tech directors better than they do.”
Forging Relationships
Heads of school are protective of their direct-report rosters, and the tech leaders who report to them say communication and respect are the keys to productive relationships.
When Kallmeyer’s current head of school was new, it took time and regular meetings “to get to know each other and understand each other,” he said. Today, the relationship is based on trust and dialogue. “That communication loop is open, and she has made herself available whenever I need, whether it’s a meeting, a text, or an email,” he said. “She is fantastic on communications.”
In their early talks, Kallmeyer and his head of school concentrated on leadership. The head of school connected him with a leadership coach “to help me make sure I was being my best self in leading this department and leading the other directors around the school. That structure allowed me to step back and think about what I was doing and how I was doing it and allowed me to prioritize my own development.”
Kallmeyer also nurtures a healthy relationship with the CFO, an alum who is relatively new in her position. In the absence of a formal reporting structure or regular meetings, Kallmeyer creates rapport through responsiveness, adherence to the CFO’s budget procedures, and respect for the challenges she is managing. The two joke about their office space, calling themselves “basement dwellers” and chatting as she walks by his office on her way to lunch. “The proximity is important,” he said. “She’s moving forward on some things, including leveraging tech in the business office. We’ve always said, ‘Whatever you need, let us know.’ ”
More important than worrying about reporting structure, tech leaders should find people who promote their professional growth, said Hanawald. Those seeking strategy-level status shouldn’t assume their work alone will attract attention, but they should “have a frank and honest conversation with your supervisor and say you feel you have something to contribute.”
“Then, be willing to listen to feedback if the person says you don’t have something to contribute,” she said. “You might think they are wrong but ask them how you can grow into that.”
No matter their aspirations, tech leaders should be “well managed by someone who helps you grow in your strategic way that prepares you for the next step,” Hanawald added. If the supervisor is not providing adequate access and attention toward that goal, the tech leader should ask outright if there’s a better way to approach them. Bringing in the resources of a professional organization such as ATLIS showcases the tech leader’s professional connections and commitment to best practices. “Hopefully, that gets people to sit up and pay attention,” said Hanawald.
It’s a balance, but technology leaders have to advocate for themselves. If you see something, say something.
Barry Kallmeyer, Chief Information Officer, Hathaway Brown School
Driving Change
Don’t have a seat at the table? “Bring your own chair and just show up,” said Kallmeyer.
Tech leaders don’t need to be at every meeting, he said, but they should speak up when they believe they can contribute to school initiatives. Otherwise, they could be waiting for an invitation that will never come. “It’s a balance, but technology leaders have to advocate for themselves,” he said. “If you see something, say something.”
Build leadership skills by creating time for planning and brainstorming, even if it means blocking it into the calendar, said Curtis. And regardless of reporting structure, “but especially if we are insulated,” tech leaders must step outside the pure-tech box to show they are school leaders, he said.
Curtis has worked with a consortium of local entities, from libraries to higher education, to share resources from their private makerspaces and turn a museum’s makerspace into a community asset accessible to all. “Those are the kinds of things we as tech leaders have to do to be recognized as true leaders,” he said. “Not just, ‘Hey, the internet is always working here.’ That’s great, but now you’re in that box as the tech guy. But if you step outside the box and do things that are nontraditional, it might surprise your community. That’s when people start to understand that this person is more than the email person.”
When being interviewed for a new position, tech leaders should ask their own questions about the school’s reporting structure and the head of school’s approach to innovation, Marcktell said. They should express their reporting structure preferences and, if the chart leads to the CFO, request a dotted line to the head of school. “If I don’t have a seat at the table at this point in my career, I don’t want the job,” he said. “If the organization has historically not respected IT enough to make a seat at the table, it’s not worth your time because you’re going to be unhappy.”
If you’re at a school stuck with somebody who doesn’t take seriously your potential to contribute to the overall organization, that’s a bigger problem than whether technology has a seat at the table.
Sarah Hanawald, One Schoolhouse
Tech leaders shouldn’t “enjoy mystifying what they do,” and they shouldn’t assume that listeners don’t understand, especially since the COVID-19 pandemic put technology directly in so many people’s hands, said Hanawald. When it’s time for important conversations with the head of school or other direct manager about a crucial investment, “find some ATLIS colleagues and role-play.”
Tech leaders who consciously build campuswide relationships and learn the operational priorities and pain points of all departments keep themselves essential among leadership and colleagues, Hanawald said.
The school’s mission and values can open doorways to high-level discussions about the tech leader’s potential and capabilities, she added. For instance, as the school is striving toward equity goals, the tech leader could share ideas for how leaders can extract equity-related data from the school’s various systems. “You’re not necessarily going to find out about those needs at the strategic team leadership meeting,” Hanawald said. “You’re going to find that out because you’ve developed relationships all over campus.”
Marcktell still recalls his epiphany when he met the head of school who cited his IT director as his most trusted employee. “It’s right out of Game of Thrones,” he said. “The Hand of the King should be the IT director—minus the dragon fire.”