Author: jameshempsall

Like many, I’m still getting to grips with video conferencing.  But I think I am hooked.  I must admit.  And I am wondering if there is greater equality in online meetings.

Over the past four months I have attended several and organised many more.  I’ve used them for one-to-ones, small group discussions and seminars for up to 200 people at a time.  Telephone calls just don’t cut it anymore.  And with limited options to travel, and an understandable reluctance to do so, it is more than an attractive option.  Especially given how much smaller my social world is at work and at home.

The benefits are many.  Gone has the need to prepare to travel, present myself, travel, arrive, settle-in, participate in meeting preamble and small talk, attend the meeting, and then do everything again – but in reverse.

There’s the obvious and instant-nature of opening up a laptop screen and the saving of time for all that unnecessary stuff and actions leading up to a meeting.  Sometimes it can be a bit of a shock – the juxtaposition of work and home life.  One minute putting out the rubbish, the next talking with the CEO.

But it is the interpersonal dynamics and powerplays that have always fascinated me in meetings, and online is no different.  And this is where I miss the table.  There simply is not a table to sit around.  This is a huge shift.  Often it is the table that is the silent force in a meeting.  Some people arrive early so they get their pick of the positions.  They may organise to arrive with someone so they can sit together, or they may choose to sit beside or opposite someone else.  In online meetings, there is no head of the table.  The dynamics of who is sitting next to who are gone.  The small screen decides who sits where, there’s no hierarchy of placement or unspoken physical alliances and battle-lines.

Online meetings strip out the opportunities to give each other sideways glances, either hostile, supportive, encouraging, cynical or coercive.  Although, let me tell you I have noticed when people are texting each other – the tech equivalent of a sideways glance.  I do it myself, I must admit.

The screen limits what we see; heads and shoulders usually – user error excepting.  People are still not always positioning their cameras to their best advantage.  But mostly, we don’t get to see the whole body, the leaking body language, and all the other captivating observational cues and signals.

And what’s more we can choose how to participate.  The functionality allows for choices in our contributions as well.  You can sit back and listen, switch off your screen or your audio, chat away on the sidebar, or raise your electronic or actual hand to indicate you want to join in.  if things get tricky, dull or you get a better offer, you can cut off the connection and blame your broadband provider.  It’s like a meeting ejector seat, at the touch of a laptop button.  It’s the stuff of dreams.

A great benefit is the reduction of awful and meaningless pre- and post-meeting chit chat.  But I am not naive enough not to realise that this is where much business gets done.  Especially in unequal workplaces.  I always felt sorry for people dialling in to meetings because when meetings ended they hang up, but the chat continues.  It’s those Columbo moments when somebody ‘remembers’ an important question – you know, usually preceded by the phrase “oh, just before you go…”.  It disadvantages those that have already left the meeting.  To some extent there is greater equality if everyone ‘dials-in’ but beware not to hang up too soon is my advice.  Overall, it does seem to feel like a levelling, more equal and choice-filled workspace than what we had before.

Too much of a rose-tinted glasses view?  Probably.  There are classic dynamics in place.  Who organised the meeting, who is chairing it, and who decides who gets to speak?  All key questions and the answers reveal who the puppet master is. The role of chair has never been more important and they need to be up to the job.

Let’s not get ahead of ourselves and believe Teams or Zoom are emancipatory forces.  The meeting controller can mute you all at the touch of a button.  A very useful function I have to say.  I have joyfully used it.  Not only for improving the quality of sound, but it gives one uninterrupted time.  It is quite a unique tool I must say.  One that really comes into play when delivering training to potentially hostile learners.  If only I’d had the benefit of that years ago.  And so, the role of meeting lead is a responsible one.  It is one that should commit to equality in participation and to make the best of this new way of working.  Perhaps an online meeting chair also needs to be the table?

Running a country, managing a business, or leading a family – they all need a considered approach. Recent events have made me think about the common mistakes people make in leadership and management. Its not their fault, there’s so much confusion out there, and it is all too easy to fall into unhelpful habits.

It’s the huge proliferation of Government COVID-19 guidance that has stimulated today’s thoughts. I must admit. I tweeted as far back as 12 May 2020 “Swimming in guidance? Makes me think: Lead from the centre. Don’t manage from the centre. Allow local to decide, manage and deliver. Enable local to inform central leadership. Focus energy on doing, not over working guidance. Allow flexibility to evolve, don’t manufacture it.”

I blogged in June on similar themes https://workstylelifestyle.blog/2020/06/13/government-is-telling-us-what-to-do-like-never-before-lets-think-about-it-before-we-agree-to-comply/

Back then I had read guidance for early years and childcare, schools, retail, gyms and barbers. Since then I have been trying to keep up with updates and changing goalposts. I had started to feel unable to breathe in and out, put one foot in front of another, or decide what to have for breakfast without consulting guidance. I feared I, like everyone around me, I was at risk of becoming guidance dependent. Guidance has its place. And its place is to advise and inform our autonomous decision-making as free-thinking individuals, with induvial circumstances, needs and wants.

I listen as every new piece of guidance is issued, and pause to wait for the inevitable barrage of questions and exclamations for people who ask “what about me? It doesn’t tell me what to do”. There should be lots of areas of our lives that aren’t specified or forethought by Whitehall mandarins. It’s a good thing. I mean, what sort of a world would it be if they did take it upon themselves to meddle in everything? One problem is all this well-intentioned guidance and its regular updates started pretty early to tie itself, and us, in knots.

Leaders lead. They inspire, empower, motivate, and enable. Managers tell you what to do check you are doing it and measure its success throughout and afterwards. It’s a somewhat simplistic view I know, but there are big differences and it can be confusing if you mix these roles up too much, and a real challenge if you are the person that has to do both.

But government should remember to lead from the centre. Managing from the centre across 151 different and diverse local authority areas (in England), is impossible. Something only necessary when local becomes dysfunctional. That is why we have local councils, to lead and manage locally. There needs to be a return to a greater sense of allowing local to decide, manage and deliver. It a lesson any business leader should heed.

Because just like in a business, if you enable the workforce, shop-floor or front-line to take ownership and make decisions, then this practical learning has the potency to better inform central leadership. As long as you listen. This results in better leadership and decision and policy making. If we allow for that, then people and colleagues can focus their energy on the business of doing or living, and not fearfully over-thinking guidance. And they can do so flexibility and innovatively. I worry that many business leaders could fall into the trap of over-thinking and controlling, following the blueprint set by the detail and frequency of government guidance. Best lead, talk, listen and manage together as a team.

In early years we have been familiar with this term, ‘school readiness’, for a little while now. Perhaps far too long. I wrote this piece in 2014 for the Nursery World website, after Ofsted published Are you ready? Good Practice in School Readiness. Today, I have revisited it. I needed to, as the issue remains unresolved.

School readiness is one of many aims of early learning for preschool children. One of many aims, did you notice? We aim to ensure that as children join us at age one, two or three, we equip them in their transition into school and into their childhoods and adulthoods. We often share a child’s first experiences of being separated from their parents, interacting with non-family member adults, taking turns, and making new friends. We can introduce families to books, positive behaviours and self-regulation, and safe boundaries and risk-taking, and a whole range of new opportunities socially, educationally and economically.

The term emerged from various reviews, guidance, and training modules including and significantly: the Allen Report (2011) on early intervention, and the Tickell Report (2011) that looked at reviewing the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) and used the term school ‘unreadiness’. There is no clear and agreed definition though. Shared understanding and agreement here would be a uniting force for partnership between early years and schools. This is something we still need.

If school readiness means we support children to develop their key skills in communication, speaking, listening and questioning, social and emotional well-being, and physical development, then count me in. If it is about producing learning robots trained to comply with a rigid and inflexible education system, then I am less keen on the idea. This is my quote and was included in The Complete Companion for Teaching and Leading Practice in the Early Years (Jarvis et al 2016). Yes, we must do our bit, but the mantle should be taken on by later educators in ways that are individualised, sensitive, inclusive and enabling. In early years we are not mechanical production lines churning out identical school-ready children like ready-meals prepared for the oven.

Ofsted agreed, somewhat, their report said “children require high quality provision and individualised support”. All types of provision should remember this and individualise their approaches. One size never fit all.

My argument is that school readiness is a partnership, and not just the ‘job’ of the early years sector, it is one that is best achieved by parents, providers, partners and schools. I fear our sector is often judged or singled-out to blame if a child doesn’t conform to the norm when arriving at schools for the first time. And on that matter, schools need to have child-readiness for working with young children and their families. It’s a two-way thing. This is all the more important now children have experienced lockdown and the effects of the pandemic. They haven’t missed out and need to catch up, they need to be supported to make sense of what has and is happening and convert these unique learning experiences into resilience and skills necessary for their successful studies, social and working lives.

What parents and carers do on a daily basis to support their children’s learning is not only important – it is essential. Even for our most frequent and long-term users of early learning, their most significant influence is their parenting. And as a sector, we should feel proud of how we engage and include parents into our services. And the ways in which we support home learning. I am pleased to see this has an ever-increasing focus across many programmes and projects, Hungry Little Minds included. However, we should not be complacent, we can always do more. So often I meet children who have low confidence, untapped potential in language and learning, and I see this replicated in their parents. Our role, in all children’s services, including schools, is to support parents to achieve their full potential too. And we do. By providing our services, we offer parents opportunities to grow and develop, learn and work, build self-esteem and confidence, and improve their and their family’s communication skills. These all contribute to a school readiness for parents. School ready parents are much more confident to engage with school and able to feel included and respected in their communities. They will also be best placed to support those vitally important periods of transition as well.

Partnerships with other settings acknowledge that children may attend two or more provisions. And specialist interventions such as speech and language therapy also offer other inputs. They help to inform assessments, recommendations and effective transitions for individual children. Initial assessments must effectively and efficiently identify a child’s starting point. Accuracy and quality here buys us the time we need to develop and individualise development programmes for all children, and drive our work in partnership with other services and professionals that offer a specialist perspective.

There are opportunities for us to balance the use of child-led and adult-led sessions. If a child becomes used to participating and enjoying adult-led learning activities, they will be ready to engage with this when it is presented to them in school. Not forgetting that it is child led activities that allow children to become independent learners, explorers and individuals, and this is of equal value to me, and something that needs to be reflected more in the school day. This is because learning in later school years, and certainly in FE and HE sectors is structured in this way. Research shows how beneficial to language development it is for children if adults around them (early years workers and parents or carers) speak clearly to children and offer opportunities to speak, be imaginative, construct sentences and ask questions. Research has shown that least advantaged children are likely to hear much fewer spoken words in their early years than their peers (Hart & Risley (1995).

We still need to agree and share a definition, one that encompasses the multi-sided nature of school readiness, one that includes children, parents and their schools. And in the meantime, let’s make sure we build in some of these principles into our everyday practice in early years.

We are open 24/7. Twenty four hours a day, seven days a week thanks to the shop website.

But we weren’t open 24/7. The 24th of July 2020.

This is why.

After four months of lockdown in Leicester, not including an all too brief fortnight when non essential shops could open, and with a new local lockdown there remain practical and common sense barriers.

We are not alone, bars, cafes, hairdressers and restaurants remain closed, as they have since March.

But wait, shops like ours were told they could open again this week. When I say ‘told’ it was more like rumour and speculation within an information drought.

But there is another rub.

We ask. How can people visit a non essential shop if they should only take essential journeys? The people of Leicester have been told to stay at home. Working at home is the preference. A luxury many don’t have.

We should only travel to work if we cannot work at home. We should walk or cycle or drive. Avoid public transport.

One should only shop for essential supplies, or venture out for health appointments or exercise. People in surrounding areas have been told not to travel into the city. We should not leave it. Which is unenforceable advice it seems.

So, guess what? Most people have been sensible and headed that public health advice. That means the city centre has returned to its quietest once again.

The official advice has been clarified. You can only visit a non essential shop whilst on an essential journey.

So, we could open for the office workers that aren’t in town, the service industry workforce who are still at home, and the county folk who aren’t travelling in. But that doesn’t make much sense. Perhaps a passing jogger would pop in and buy a desk, for their home working, and carry it home? Maybe someone on their bike would like to purchase a dinner set and keep their fingers crossed it makes the perilous journey home?

It doesn’t seem likely. Instead, we will carry on building our online trading and deliveries, click and collect if that suits our customers, and on screen in store virtual shopping appointments. Our social media will continue to engage and excite our loyal customers. And we are very grateful for that. It’s been wonderful to see them on their doorsteps during local delivery rounds in the afternoons.

We eagerly await the relaxing of local lockdown, the return of the city’s vibrant cafe culture and our customers beginning to return to familiar routines and entering through our open doors.

We will be ready, 24/7.

We are used to the concept of workforce recruitment and retention strategies, but are you ready, willing and able to lead a migration strategy?

A migration strategy would support the workforce with their individual challenges arising from COVID-19 and do whatever possible to support them to stay in the sector, move to new or different roles and help the local market respond to the changing needs of children and families.  For now, and in the medium- and long-term futures.

COVID-19 has wreaked havoc on our sector.  Families’ economic and social behaviours have changed over the past months, they continue to change now, and they will evolve further in the following weeks, months, and perhaps years.

Guidance and lockdown required settings to adhere to certain actions and manage their businesses differently.  As a result, providers have either closed and remained so, or closed and reopened, are preparing to open again in the autumn, or have remained open throughout.

Opening has been a combination of different types.  Through the early days of lockdown, partial opening catered for the children of keyworkers and vulnerable children.  Around 25% of settings were open and were used by around 10% of children that usually attended.  We noticed examples of how staff moved from closed settings to open ones to fill capacity and skills gaps, such as holding Paediatric First Aid.

Since then, and particularly after 1 June 2020, settings have gradually reopened places, and families have presented themselves at settings to use their funded and paid-for places.  Local lockdowns have become a reality and may affect other areas.  Wider reopening plans and the ambition to open all schools and settings for the beginning of autumn term in September 2020, offer a renewed focus and a new challenge for all.

The workforce has continued to be supported by early years funding being paid in full so far, and for the autumn term, and/or the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS or ‘furloughing’).  Finances are not easy, quite the opposite.  The phased return of staff into settings as demand increases and the CJRS ends (31 October 2020) will require a whole range of different business decisions and choices.  These will be difficult and dramatic for some.  This will include remodelling the workforce, some teams will reduce, some will go, some will increase.  All will need to change.

The risk to the sector is that valuable trained, qualified and experienced members of the workforce will leave their settings.  A migration strategy would look at ways in which individuals could be supported to stay in the sector.  How we can help with their career thinking, job choices, role maintenance, professional development and progression, or job switches to other parts of the early years sector.  For example, how many of the local workforce could move from group provision and into childminding or vice versa.  Will there be workers moving into or out of provision based in or run by a school?

Like early years settings and schools, need and demand from families has changed.  You may have noticed the DWP list getting bigger as Universal Credit claims balloon, and unemployment increases.  You may have noticed demand for 30 hours staying the same or changing, up or down, as family employment patterns are transformed.  It might be too early yet.  These dynamics will also drive provider and delivery model change through autumn and beyond.

The proportion of the different types of places in settings will shift around (0-2, 2, 3-4 whether funded or paid for).  Parents are taking a second look at their previous childcare use and developing new preferences for the future.  Are they looking at group provision rather than childminding or childminding to replace group provision?  There may also be a trend towards single setting use – stimulated by guidance, by schools or by family predilections.  There are big implications for out of school here this is something to keep on top of.  Each setting will need to look at their model, the offer and take-up and ensure staff meet these requirements.  With increases in two-year-old eligibility, a good example would be settings needing staff with experience of working with two-year-olds.  This could be a temporary or a long-term measure.  Whatever, it will benefit from a migration strategy.

One huge issue is the availability of the workforce.  We cannot have provision without the workforce.  They themselves are not immune to the economic, employment and social changes affecting the entire population.

Some of the workforce will not want to return.  Or their ability to work will have changed.  Their preferences for how they work, when they work, and what they want to do are shifting as well.  Some will not want to return after being furloughed.  These experiences will prompt retirements and career changes.  That is natural and to be expected.

The workforce have concerns about their own health and safety, their physical and mental wellbeing, and that of their households and extended families.  Working safely in a setting or school is one thing but returning home to their own family is a different consideration.

There are personal and professional preferences as to how PPE should or could be used, this can cause tension and anxiety.  For childminders, accepting people into their own home presents new risks.  They may want their homes back.  In contrast, workers currently working in group provision might decide they would prefer to work with smaller numbers of children in their homes.  Their own or their family’s employment and economic status could be impacted.  Other jobs or that of their partner’s could have increased, decreased or disappeared.

With phased reopening, new models of delivery, local lockdowns, and/or second waves, the workforce may struggle to reconcile work with their own school and childcare arrangements.  Practical availability and the sums might just not add up, resulting in a staff member leaving a setting and looking elsewhere.  We need to catch as many as we can at this moment.

At key times of change people decide to leave.  They may just feel they have done enough, or all they can, in the sector, in their role, or in their setting.  They may decide to move away from childminding after a few years as their children have grown.  Some may choose the option of redundancy.

We could easily lose people that we cannot afford to lose.  So what can we do about it?  How can you keep the workforce in the early years sector?  What actions can be taken to support them before they stay or they are lost temporarily and not forever?  Here are a few considerations for what could be in an EY workforce migration strategy:

1. Help settings manage and take their workforce decisions during reopening, restructuring and in managing furlough return.
2. Offer recruitment and retention training for setting leaders, that promotes employment flexibility, sustainability and scalability.
3. Promote new models of delivery and show settings how to break out of traditional ways of working, creating new types of employment in the process.
4. Help schools to change in ways that are sensitive to the local childcare market.  So they are aware of what is happening in the childcare market (families and providers), they change their models as required, they do so with consideration to the local PVI and use their local position properly, and foster effective local ‘business relationships in the sector’.
5. Share regular information about demand, need and preference changes in the local market so all business leaders understand what is happening to that and its effect on eligibility for two-year-olds, universal and 30 hours funding.
6. Provide a confidential and impartial career advice service for individuals working in the sector and at risk of leaving. With the aim of keeping them if at all possible, or helping them with career barriers, and short- to long-term development.
7. Be able to broker employment opportunities. Can you have a jobs board somewhere online?  Can people post what they want or what they have to offer?  How can you facilitate the sharing of information and connect practitioners to providers?  Like speed dating for work.
8. Develop networks or clusters of employment between settings, supporting more of the workforce to work safely across different settings, perhaps in hubs.
9. Support with fast-tracked registration changes with Ofsted so settings can change or open-up nimbly before it is too late.
10. Promote childminder recruitment and registration so numbers continue to be stable or grow in response to actual demand types and locations. Support group practitioners to transition into childminding and vice versa.