Leadership is not ownership: Former school heads urged to respect successors

The education sector continues to witness a worrying practice where some transferred or retired principals and headteachers find it difficult to relinquish control of institutions they previously managed. Despite officially handing over their offices, some continue interfering with the day-to-day operations of their former schools, raising questions about professionalism, leadership ethics and respect for institutional structures.

While serving in a school leadership position comes with significant responsibilities, it is important to understand that such authority is attached to the office and not the individual occupying it. Once a principal or headteacher is transferred or retires, the administrative mandate automatically moves to the officially appointed successor.

Unfortunately, some former school heads continue behaving as though they still occupy those positions. They reportedly maintain close control over teachers, influence administrative decisions, summon staff members and sometimes attempt to dictate how their successors should run the institutions.

This practice undermines the very principles of leadership and institutional accountability.

When a former principal continues issuing instructions to teachers or influencing decisions made by the serving head, confusion inevitably arises. Teachers may find themselves caught between the former administrator and the current officeholder.

Such circumstances weaken the chain of command and can create unnecessary divisions among staff members.

Every institution requires one recognised administrative authority. The incoming principal or headteacher must be allowed to exercise the responsibilities attached to the office without interference.

One of the greatest demonstrations of leadership maturity is the ability to respect the person taking over from you.

A newly appointed principal or headteacher deserves an opportunity to understand the institution, assess its challenges, establish working relationships and introduce appropriate management strategies.

Former administrators should resist the temptation to micromanage their successors or question every decision they make.

Even where the outgoing administrator believes there are better ways of doing things, professional advice should be offered through appropriate channels rather than through unofficial instructions to teachers.

Schools are not personal properties

Perhaps the biggest misconception among some former school administrators is treating institutions as personal establishments.

A school belongs to the community and operates within established government structures. It does not belong to the individual who served as principal or headteacher.

Years of dedicated service, personal relationships with teachers and contributions towards institutional development do not translate into permanent ownership or authority.

A former administrator should understand that the institution must continue operating independently after their departure.

Some may begin consulting the former administrator before implementing decisions made by the serving head. Others may use their relationship with the predecessor to challenge the authority of the current administration.

This creates an unhealthy working environment and may undermine teamwork, discipline and institutional stability.

Teachers should be encouraged to respect established administrative structures rather than participate in parallel leadership arrangements.

Retirement should be an opportunity to enjoy the fruits of years of service, mentor others when appropriately invited and contribute to society in different capacities.

Similarly, a transferred administrator should focus on the new responsibilities assigned rather than remain preoccupied with the institution they have left.

There is nothing wrong with maintaining friendships with former colleagues or occasionally visiting a former school. However, such visits should not become opportunities to interfere with administrative decisions or undermine the serving head.

There is a clear distinction between offering mentorship and exercising unofficial authority.

The incoming head must be allowed to lead

The Ministry of Education and Teachers Service Commission have established administrative structures governing the management of educational institutions. School leadership responsibilities should be exercised by the duly appointed officeholders.

Where concerns arise about interference, institutions should address them through appropriate administrative channels to protect professional boundaries and ensure continuity of school operations.

Former administrators should also recognise that their successors may have different leadership styles and priorities. Differences in management approaches should not automatically be interpreted as poor administration.

Leadership is temporary, but institutions are permanent.

A good principal or headteacher should not only be remembered for achievements made while in office but also for the ability to leave the institution in a manner that allows the next administration to thrive.

There is dignity in handing over power gracefully. There is wisdom in respecting successors, and there is professionalism in understanding that every leadership position has a beginning and an end.

Former principals and headteachers should resist the temptation to remain shadow administrators after leaving office.

Once you are transferred or retired, hand over the office, the authority and the responsibility. Allow the new administrator to lead.

Ultimately, the interests of learners, teachers and the institution must always come before personal egos, individual attachments and the desire to retain influence.