University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

The candor to live in ongoing educational innovation

(USC Thesis Other)

The candor to live in ongoing educational innovation

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

i

The Candor to Live in Ongoing Educational Innovation

by

Cristina Ewell

A Dissertation Presented to
THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

August, 2018

Copyright © Cristina Ewell. All rights reserved.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
II

DEDICATION
To my sons,
Alex and Andy.
May you have the courage to deeply love those around you,
and to engage in challenging conversations with your hearts and minds.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
III

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank my professors at the University of Southern California for
what has been a truly transformative experience. A research focus on understanding
diversity has helped me to understand others and myself more deeply. I have developed a
more profound understanding of the uniqueness of my own life journey as well as greater
empathy for the path of others. As a result of this doctoral journey, I have found my
voice.
I am grateful to my dissertation chair, Dr. Melora Sundt, for her unwavering
support and encouragement. When doing a dissertation that, in a large part has been an
analysis of feedback, I have been very fortunate to have a chair who is an expert on the
subject of radical candor not only theoretically but also in practice. I am also grateful to
my committee: Drs. Ruth Cheng and Lawrence Picus, who have helped me analyze not
only my interests but also my soul as I searched for a dissertation topic as well as new
paths in life. I would also like to thank Dr. Kenneth Yates for his generosity of spirit and
his expertise in the gap analysis process. I extend a special thank-you to Patricia Hahn for
her skill and graciousness with editing.
This work has been in large part the fruition of a colleagial journey with an
amazing team of educators. I have been fortunate enough to work with a team of
teachers and community volunteers brave enough to believe that all students can learn at
high levels. The journey has been frought with impassioned philosophical conversations
well after school hours, last minute rushes to create that special intervention for one
student, and challenging discussions in which we called each other to accountability. In
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
IV

particular, I would like to thank Greg Duncan, whose continued guidance and support of
our team has been foundational to our success. I would like to thank my team members
and community volunteers from the 2017-2018 school year: Rodica Harvey, Rogelio
Bolaños, Greg Reynen, Carlos Castaño, Zainon Kadir, Karina Lee, Joanna Alvarado,
María Kullwitz, Josefina Ruiz Soto, and Gloria Trujillo. I am also grateful to Lance
Kershner for the intergral part he played in establishing a well-functioning team. Thanks
also to Felipe Sanchez and Jean Ruekert for collaborating to develop a seamless learning
experience for our students from the younger years through high school. I would also like
to thank Dr. Susan Zhang for believing in me and for providing so many learning
opportunities to grow professionally and spread my wings.
Each individual in this journey has helped me to grow as an educator and as a
person. On a personal level, I thank you for your friendship. As a mother of two
children, I thank you for your humility, dedication, and talent in providing clear pathways
to additive bilingualism and multilingualism for all students.
Finally, and most importantly, I am especially thankful of my family for their
patience during this journey the past three years. I will always remember my youngest
son’s hushed comments while playing a board game in the living room with his brother
and a group of friends: “Shhh! We need to be quieter. Mom is writing her dissertation.”
The way he said it made a dissertation seem more important than it needed to be, but the
tone of pride in his voice gave me forte to persist. Many thanks go to my husband, Dr.
Leonid Kasperovich, for his quiet patience and wonderful jazz improvisations on the
piano as I sat and wrote.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
V

TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES vii
LIST OF TABLES viii
ABSTRACT xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM 1
Background of the Problem 2
Problem Solving Conceptual Framework 10
Importance of Addressing the Problem 13
Organizational Context and Mission 14
Organizational Goal 15
Description of Stakeholder Groups 17
Stakeholder Performance Goals 17
Stakeholder Group Selected for the Study 18
Purpose and Research Questions 19
Conceptual and Methodological Framework 19
Definition of Terms 20
Organization of the Dissertation 20

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 22
General Problem of Practice 22
Conclusion 49

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 51
Conceptual and Methodological Framework 51
Assessment of Performance Influences 53
Data Collection 58
Recruitment, Data Collection, and Analysis 65
Role of Investigator 70

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS 72
Knowledge 72
Motivational Influences 106
Organizational Influences 116
Sumary of KMO Assumed Influences 128

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, IMPLEMENTATION, AND EVALUATION 131
The Organizational Ideal 131
The Current State of the Organization 133
Rationale for the Recommendations 134
Recommendations for Practice 136
Recommendations for Further Study 137
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
VI

Limitations and Delimitations 154
Conclusion 156

REFERENCES 158
APPENDIX A: SURVEY INSTRUMENT 165

APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL 170

APPENDIX C: FOCUS GROUP PROTOCOL 171

APPENDIX D: MEETING AGENDA 172

APPENDIX E: FOCUS GROUP EVIDENCE 174

APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW NOTES 176

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
VII

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1. The four quadrants of radical candor 3
Figure 1.2. Conflict management model of assertiveness and cooperation 4
Figure 1.3. Juxtaposition of Thomas’s and Scott’s models 5
Figure 1.4. Visualization of the Clark and Estes (2008), and Kirkpatrick (2016)
models 11

Figure 1.5. Ongoing gap analysis in a culture of radical candor 12
Figure 2.1. Flowchart delineating the study 23
Figure 4.1. Juxtoposition of survey and interview findings in conflict and candor
Models 93

Figure 5.1. The ideal of the organization 132

Figure 5.2. The reality of the organization 133

Figure 5.3. Action steps to teach the goal 134

Figure 5.4. Original framework 141

Figure 5.5. Juxtoposed framework with discrete learning objectives 141

Figure 5.6. Progress toward mastery (January 15, 2018 - March 15, 2018) 142

Figure 5.7. Teacher view of progress toward mastery (January 15, 2018 –
March 15, 2018) 143

Figure 5.8. Overall view of student mastery as of March 15, 2018 144

Figure 5.9. Student 7’s view of objectives mastered and the next steps for learning 145

Figure 5.10. Summary of the results and recommendations 156

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
VIII

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1. Gilbert’s guide to social mentalities 8
Table 1.2. Professional pivots of ISE 16
Table 1.3. Professional pivots in the radical candor framework 16
Table 1.4. Organizational mission, global goal, and stakeholder performance goals 18
Table 2.1. Assumed knowledge needs for the implementation of radical candor 33
Table 2.2. Assumed motivational needs for the implementation of radical candor 41
Table 2.3. Organizational factors in the implementation of radical candor 50
Table 3.1. Summary of influences affecting the implementation of radical candor 52
Table 3.2. Assumed factual knowledge needs and means of measurement 53
Table 3.3. Assumed conceptual knowledge needs and means of measurement 54
Table 3.4. Assumed procedural knowledge needs and means of measurement 54
Table 3.5. Assumed metacognitive knowledge needs and means of measurement 55
Table 3.6. Assumed motivational needs regarding self-efficacy and means of
measurement 55

Table 3.7. Assumed motivational needs regarding attributions and means of
measures 56

Table 3.8. Assumed motivational needs regarding values and means of
measurement 56

Table 3.9. Assumed motivational needs regarding goal orientation and means of
measurement 56

Table 3.10. Assumed organizational factors regarding communication of the goal
and means of measurement 57

Table 3.11. Assumed organizational factors regarding alignment of the goal and
means of measurement 57

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
IX

Table 3.12. Assumed organizational factors regarding incentives and means of
measurement 58

Table 3.13. Assumed organizational factors regarding resources and means of
measurement 58

Table 3.14. Knowledge survey items based upon assumed influence 61

Table 3.15. Assumed influence of self-efficacy 62

Table 3.16. Assumed influence of values on motivation 62

Table 3.17. Assumed influence of goal orientation on motivation 62

Table 3.18. Communication of the measurable goal survey items based upon
assumed influence 63

Table 3.19. Alignment of the goal survey items based upon assumed influence 63

Table 3.20. Organizational factor: Incentive survey items based upon assumed
Influence 64

Table 3.21. Metacognitive interview items based upon assumed influence 64

Table 3.22. Motivational interview items based upon assumed influence 64

Table 3.23. Organizational factor interview items based upon assumed influence 65

Table 3.24. Procedural knowledge influences and focus group prompts 66

Table 4.1. Teacher leaders can identify types of feedback and compassion 73

Table 4.2. Teacher leaders can identify the organizational goal for radical candor 77

Table 4.3. Comparison between personality type and response to threat 78

Table 4.4. Teacher leaders can identify how the team may respond to feedback 80

Table 4.5. There is understanding among teacher leaders of their own
self-compassion 83

Table 4.6. Teacher leaders’ understanding of self-compassion 84

Table 4.7. Connection between feedback and compassion 86

Table 4.8. Teachers understand the culture of their own teams 86
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
X

Table 4.9. Relationship between feedback and compassion 87

Table 4.10. Procedural knowledge of the solicitation of feedback 95

Table 4.11. Teacher leaders solicit feedback personally and in meetings 95

Table 4.12. Teachers can help colleagues understand self-compassion 97

Table 4.13. Teacher leaders know how to implement a culture of candor 100

Table 4.14. Metacognition of strengths and weaknesses 102

Table 4.15. Relationship between the goal and radical candor 104

Table 4.16. Summary of assumed knowledge factors and gap validations 105

Table 4.17. Confidence in engaging in feedback 106

Table 4.18. Confidence in engaging in feedback with the superintendent 108

Table 4.19. Confidence in compassion 109

Table 4.20. Confidence in the team to engage in feedback 110

Table 4.21. Beliefs that responsibility for feedback is within 111

Table 4.22. Confidence in the ability to extend compassion 111

Table 4.23. Teacher leaders are confident in extending compassion to teams 112

Table 4.24. Responsibility to provide feedback within teams 113

Table 4.25. Radical candor and alignment with goals 115

Table 4.26. Summary of ssumed motivational factors 116

Table 4.27. Leadership communicates the need for radical candor 117

Table 4.28. Administration models candor 118

Table 4.29. Leadership models RC 120

Table 4.30. Interview responses to sensitive topics 123

Table 4.31. Rewards for radical candor 125

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
XI

Table 4.32. Summary of organizational rewards for radical candor 126

Table 4.33. Summary of organizational influences 129

Table 4.34. Map of the KMO of the organization related to radical candor 129

Table 5.1. Mission and goals of the organization 132

Table 5.2. Recommendations based on external indicators 139

Table 5.3. Recommendations based on internal indicators 139

Table 5.4. Critical managerial behaviors for the implementation of radical candor 149

Table 5.5. Support of critical behaviors 150

Table 5.6. Learning goals for administration and teacher leaders 151

Table 5.7. Methods and activities that assess the attainment of learning goals 152

Table 5.8. Reactions to training in RC 153

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
XII

ABSTRACT

Radical candor presents a model in which high levels of direct challenge intersect
with equally high levels of personal care (Scott, 2017), thus creating an organizational
culture where feedback can help both the organization and individuals grow toward
maximum potential. This study analyzed the knowledge, motivation and organizational
behaviors (KMO) necessary to create a culture of radical candor at the International
School for Expatriates (ISE). Radical candor is needed in order for ISE to achieve its
organizational goal of creating personalized learning paths that enable all students to
learn at a high level.
This study focused on the disparate components of radical candor within the
teacher leaders of the organization. The findings revealed a strong sense of motivation for
radical candor within ISE. However, two areas of motivation were validated as gaps:
personal responsibility and personal confidence. All aspects of knowledge and
organizational behaviors were also validated as gaps. The recommendations for practice
were to provide data access to teacher leaders that would enable teams to measure
progress toward the larger organizational goal, to remove organizational barriers to
radical candor at the administrative level, and to create professional development
opportunities.
This study was limited to the study of one organization. Despite this limitation it
is the hope of this researcher that iterative and purposeful planning around a culture of
radical candor will one day provide a roadmap for educational culture that enables an
iterative, purposeful, open and caring discussion in the face of the ongoing struggle of
educational innovation.

1

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM

As modern organizations are struggling with an exponential rate of change
(Kotter, 2009) in which companies need to innovate at faster paces than ever before
(Evans & Forth, 2015), organizations struggle with how to overcome the silent resistance
to change. People and organizations resist change (Kotter, 1996); however, in order to
continue to remain relevant and innovative, organizations and institutions need to find
ways to effectively manage the conflict inherent in the change process.
Organizations are able to learn and innovate in a culture that draws collaboratively
on the knowledge and skills of all members (Herriot & Pemberton, 1995). Innovation is not
a clean, linear process; rather, it is an iterative process that demands continuous feedback
(Kline & Rosenburg, 1986). Effective feedback channels are comprised of of two
elements: (a) the provision of timely, concrete and constructive information; and (b) the
application of that information to modify organizational performance (Ashford & Tsui,
1991; Baron, 1988; Miliken & Morrison, 2000). Both elements are critical. If no feedback
is offered, the organization may miss crucial opportunities to self-correct during the change
process. If feedback is ignored, the likelihood for additional feedback will be extinguished
(Miliken & Morrison).
Creating a culture in which candid feedback is provided is difficult, particularly
during a period of change. Differences in status or power between the provider and
receiver of feedback can influence the degree to which it is freely offered (Miliken &
Morrison, 2000). Fear of reprisal for offering other than completely positive feedback can
stifle the offering of feedback. Yet for the organization to adapt to change successfully,
effective feedback channels are a necessary condition (Schein, 2004). Timely and candid
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
2

feedback is deemed more important than ever in a knowledge-based and diverse workforce
(Ashford, Blatt & Walle, 2003).
The current research study analyzed the knowledge, motivation and
organizational behaviors (KMO, Clark & Estes, 2008) needed within an organization to
encourage and enable a culture of open dialogue in the form of radical candor (Scott,
2017) among diverse stakeholders. The goal of the study was to provide practical
recommendations for aiding the institution in creating and enhancing a culture of candor
for diverse groups in light of the need for ongoing innovation.
Background of the Problem

A diverse workforce can be positively correlated with innovation and creativity;
however, diversity can also be a source of conflict (Bassett‐Jones, 2005). Engaging in
conversation around topics of conflict within the context of work is often deemed to be
impolite at best (Kasper, 1990) and career threatening at worst. Important stakeholders in
organizations often remain silent when problems or conflict arise (Kim & Vich, 2016;
Morrison & Milliken, 2000). Organizational silence is the “...widespread withholding of
input by employees, who collectively perceive speaking up as dangerous or futile
(Morrison & Milliken, 2003, p. 1354).” Nevertheless, the results of organizational
silence can be disastrous (Ashford, Blatt & Walle, 2003; Millensen, 2003; Oppel, 2002)
or simply ridiculously inefficient (Harvey, 1998). How might an organization
purposefully create a culture in which diverse voices are able to confront issues in order
to reach organizational goals?
One approach to confronting organizational silence is radical candor (Scott,
2017). Radical Candor is the “... proactive and compassionate engagement in [the]
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
3

unpleasant and direct feedback process (Kim & Vich, 2016, p. 12).” Scott (2017)
identified a vertical axis of caring personally and horizontal axis of challenging
directly. In this model, the ideal quadrant for a person or organization would be that of
the top right, at the intersection of the highest degree of personal care and direct
challenge (see Figure 1.1).

Source: Image retrieved from: https://www.radicalcandor.com/about-radical-candor/

Figure 1.1. The four quadrants of radical candor (Scott, 2017)

In many ways, radical candor parallels the identification of conflict handling
modes presented by Thomas (1992). Thomas’ Conflict Management Model presents an
intersection of high levels of assertiveness and high levels of cooperation that intersect to
produce collaboration, mid levels of assertiveness and cooperation resulting in
compromise, and low levels of assertiveness and cooperation resulting in conflict
avoidance (see Figure 1.2).
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
4

Source: Thomas (1992), p. 266.
Figure 1.2. Conflict management model of assertiveness and cooperation

The axis of “care personally” in Scott’s framework relates to Thomas’ axis of
cooperation, while the axis of “challenge directly” relates to the axis of assertiveness in
Thomas’ paradigm. As shown in Figure 1.3, changing the directionality of the axes of
Thomas’ model and overlaying it with Scott’s model clarifies the relationship between
the two different models that conceptualize how conflict plays out in organizations.
In order to understand radical candor, it is important to define the axes of “care
personally” and “challenge directly.” In a slight deviation from Thomas’ model (1992),
which draws on the literature around conflict management (Pondy, 1967; Walton, 1969),
radical candor relates the axis of “challenge directly” to the literature on feedback, and
the “care personally” axis can be housed in literature that is related to self compassion

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
5

Figure 1.3. Juxtaposition of the Thomas’s and Scott’s models

and compassion for others (Conchie & Rath, 2009; Gilbert, 2014; Kim & Vich, 2016;
Neff, 2003).
Feedback
The literature on feedback provides a window into the discussion on
candor. Ashford (1986) revealed that direct feedback helps people meet goals and
regulate behaviors. DeNisi & Kluger (1996), however, offered a warning to those putting
hope in feedback as a means of improving personal or organizational
performance. According to DeNisi & Kluger’s (1996) meta-analysis, one-third of
feedback has a positive effect, one-third has a neutral effect, and one-third has a negative
effect on performance.
DeNisi and Kluger (1996) presented a formidable list of variables that influence
the effectiveness or destructiveness of feedback interventions. The type of feedback given
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
6

affects the results. For example, feedback that involves praise or the ego can be
destructive if it is negative and can appear controlling if positive. People generally tend
to respond positively to feedback that compares how they were doing in the past with the
present if the goals remain consistent. People tend to respond positively to corrective
feedback if it is specific enough, but not too specific so as to be controlling. The
characteristics of the task on hand also play a role. Simple tasks as compared to complex
cognitive tasks requiring tacit knowledge require different types of feedback. Situational
variables such as whether the goal is externally provided or internally provided can play a
role in the success or failure of the feedback. Last, but not least, the personality of the
person receiving the feedback also plays a role in the effectiveness of the results. Self-
esteem, locus of control, tendency for cognitive interference and altruism are all aspects
of personality that can play into what an individual does with feedback that is given. In
sum, providing feedback effectively can appear to be a minefield that would require a
real expert to navigate effectively, with only a one third probability of improvement and a
one third probability of destructive results.
Upon a closer look at DeNisi and Kluger’s (1996) study, it becomes evident that
feedback in the study was often defined by grades (which are known to have a negative
effect on motivation because of the extrinsic value placed on the acquisition of
knowledge) or by performance appraisals. As early as 1983, Ashford and Cummings
criticized the feedback literature for its focus on summative feedback such as
performance appraisals. Allen, Poteat & Shockley (2010) found that student output and
learning had a direct relationship with the frequency of feedback. This would indicate
that the summative feedback model such as performance appraisals would not be likely to
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
7

have a positive influence toward meeting desired results or goals. Instead, feedback that
is part of an iterative or formative process toward a clearly expressed and measurable
goal, and provided in a timely manner is related to gains in performance (Allen, Poteat &
Shockley, 2010).
The way the feedback is given also matters (Baron, 1988). In Baron’s (1988)
study, the effects of constructive and destructive criticism were compared. In the study,
constructive feedback was defined by what was considerate, specific and that did not
attribute a lack of performance to the inherent characteristics of the person receiving the
feedback. Constructive feedback focused on the task, not the person. Destructive
criticism gave negative feedback on inherent characteristics of the person rather than the
task at hand. It was determined in the study that destructive criticism led to poorer results,
a decrease in efficacy, and unproductive conflict.
In conclusion, the improper use of feedback can be desructive. In order for
feedback to be effective, it must be timely (Allen, Poteat & Shockley, 2010; Ashford &
Cummings, 1983), focused on results or goals rather than inherent characteristics of a
person (Baron, 1998), and must be delivered in a humane and compassionate manner.
Compassion. The effective use of radical candor relies on the timely use of
effective feedback and has equal reliance on engagement in compassion (Kim & Vich,
2016). The person speaking or giving feedback is only one part of the conversation. The
person receiving the feedback needs to be in a psychological state where the information
or feedback can be processed (Gilbert, 2014). Feedback is often perceived as a threat
(Allen, Poteat, & Schockley, 2010), and the response to the feedback depends largely
upon the mindset from which the individual or team members operate (Gilbert,
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
8

2014). DeNisi and Kluger (1996) proposed that the personality of the individual
receiving feedback influences the results of the feedback
Gilbert (2014) provided a framework to help navigate the minefield of how
people might respond to feedback. Gilbert (2014) proposed that individuals or teams
may operate within different schemas inherent in human nature and
psychology. According to Gilbert, there are five main types of human interaction that
have evolved over time from which may affect how individuals interact: sexual,
competitive, collaborative, care-giving, or care-eliciting. Gilbert’s Guide to Social
Mentalities (see Table 1.1) delineates the types of reactions that one might encounter
based upon the psychological category of operation of the individual or team.

Table 1.1. Gilbert’s guide to social mentalities
Source: Gilbert, 2014, p. 12.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
9

Gilbert’s guide is very helpful for anticipating the possible reaction of a person or
team in the feedback process. For example, if a person or a team is in a competitive
mode, there will likely be a strong sense of power differentiation and involuntary
subordination resulting in a sense of shame or abuse. If a person or a team is functioning
from a cooperative mode, it is likely that the person may feel unappreciated or that she is
not receiving adequate compensation (emotional or otherwise) for the efforts provided. If
a person is working from a care-giving perspective, it is likely that the individual may
sense feelings of guilt or be overwhelmed at all that needs to be done. Finally, if a person
is operating from a perspective of seeking caring, while he or she may be seeking
guidance that may be perceived as a search for feedback, this person may also become
withdrawn, unavailable, or threatening in a situation of feedback or conflict.
The purposeful identification of the level of collaboration, competition, or
caregiving within a team, may be a first step toward recognizing and understanding
another’s point of view in the feedback process, and thereby form a basis for compassion
(Gilbert, 2014; Kim & Vich, 2016). Compassion for self (Neff, 2003) is of particular
importance to the study of candor, as it allows one to accept mistakes as part of life
without inflicting self punishment. When compassion for self and others is enculturated
in a team, the team is more likely to form secure relationships that help the brain to offset
the perception of threat inherent in the feedback process (Gilbert, 2014).
In summary, the concept of radical candor draws on the intersection of the literary
bases of conflict management (Pondy, 1967; Thomas, 1992; Walton, 1969), compassion
(Gilbert, 2014; Neff, 2003) and feedback (Allen, Poteat, & Schockley, 2010; Ashford &
Cummings, 1983; Baron, 1988, DeNisi & Kluger, 1996). Kim and Vich (2016) proposed
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
10

that radical candor is compassionate and proactive feedback; when practiced in a team it
helps foster more secure relationships. The problem of practice for the current study was
a pragmatic one. How does one ensure a culture of radical candor in an organization?
Problem Solving Conceptual Framework
This study addressed the problem through a gap analysis model (Clark & Estes,
2008) in which the researcher identified the organizational performance goal and the
organization’s current performance status, which often results in the identification of a
gap between the current and desired status. Clark and Estes (2008) suggested the key
influencers that drive human and, therefore, organizational performance, are knowledge
and skills, motivation and organizational (KMO) factors. The knowledge, motivation and
organizational behaviors of the key stakeholders needed to achieve the goal are identified
from the research literature, and then assessed within the key stakeholder groups, with the
intention of then being able to bridge the gap between the current status and the goal by
providing stakeholders the KMO needed to achieve success for the organization. When
the gap analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008) is used in conjunction with the Kirkpatrick
program design and evaluation model (2016), an organization then has the capacity not
only to identify the problem, but also to backward plan action steps in order to ensure that
the problem is addressed, and the goals of the organization are met (see Figure 1.4).
The gap analysis model of Clark & Estes (2008) provides a researcher with the
tools to identify a complex host of issues needed to bring about change in an
organization. However, one of the limitations of the gap analysis model is the amount of
time and resources available to the researcher to identify all of the gaps, stakeholders, and
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
11

Figure 1.4. Visualization of the Clark and Estes (2008), and Kirkpatrick (2016) models

stakeholder needs as the organization continues to evolve. The model relies heavily upon
the skill of the researcher to identify the problem correctly, and to know what questions
to ask of whom.
In an organization with a culture of radical candor, key stakeholders come to the
forefront in a grassroots manner to identify and solve the problems of the organizational
gap. A culture of radical candor differs from the top-down manner of inquiry in which the
researcher and administration have the onus of control and responsibility to find and ask
the right questions. In an organizational culture of radical candor, key stakeholders
identify knowledge gaps, motivational hindrances and organizational barriers and present
them candidly. By the onus of responsibility for the achievement of the goal being on the
stakeholder, several steps of the original process of the gap analysis (Clark & Estes,
2008) and Kirkpatrick (2016) model may be sidestepped. While these processes are still
valuable from an overarching view of the administration, the ownership of the goal and
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
12

the candor to achieve it in the hands of stakeholders allows for a much faster cycle of
iteration, thus allowing for a more innovative organizational culture (see Figure 1.5).
The combination of the concepts of radical candor (Scott, 2017) with the
frameworks of gap analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008; Kirkpatrick, 2016) provide a
particularly interesting construct for organizations wishing to be able to meet goals in a
changing environment in a timely manner. In conclusion, the gap analysis serves as a
framework by which to understand how to implement an organizational change (Clark &
Estes, 2008), and the Kirkpatrick model (2016) provides a framework for filling the gap.
Radical candor provides a framework for addressing problems inherent in organizational
silence (Scott, 2017). The combination of the three conceptual frameworks provide an
organization the capacity to work systematically and effectively in meeting goals in a
timely manner.

Figure 1.5. Ongoing gap analysis in a culture of radical candor
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
13

Importance of Addressing the Problem

Organizational silence, or the inability of organizations to facilitate the internal
sharing of critical, sometimes negative, feedback, is associated with a number of negative
consequences. Organizational silence is tied to a decrease in the level of commitment of
stakeholders (Alvani et. al., 2012) as well as increased resistance to change (Morrison &
Milliken, 2000). In health care, silence has been associated with thousands of patient
deaths (Millensen, 2003). Organizational silence in IT has been associated with
unnecessary project prolongation and failure (Keil & Park, 2009). The effects of
organizational silence have touched the hospitality industry and hotels, specifically
(Ehtiyar & Yanardağ, 2008), institutions of learning (Bickel, Dankoski, & Gusic, 2014),
energy and finance (Oppel, 2002), medicine (Millensen, 2003), and tech companies (Keil
& Park, 2009).
The problem of organizational silence in education is important to address for
several reasons. Currently, the world is in a state of rapid, technological change that is
transforming the way organizations operate (Evans & Forth, 2015). The knowledge-
based economy is causing significant change to the structures of modern organizations
(Adler, 2001). This change and disruption inevitably create conflict. The conflict can be
swept under the rug (organizational silence) resulting in roadblocks to change and
development (Morrison & Milliken, 2000), or the conflict can be addressed or managed
(Scott, 2017; Thomas, 1992). Learning institutions will need to model how to manage
contradictory views and ideas in order prepare students for this new and changing world.
Radical candor (Scott, 2017), on the other hand, presents a construct through
which organizations can use patterns of compassion and conflict engagement to make
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
14

transparent the behaviors of the organization that might otherwise have led to
transformational failure. An organization with a culture of radical candor will be a
compassionate, collaborative, and candid organization with its eyes on results (Kim &
Vich, 2016; Scott, 2017). The attention to results will drive deep and meaningful
conversations that do not just accept, but rather expect, ideas and changes to be
challenged directly within and between teams of similar and different levels of hierarchy
within an organization (Collins, 2001; Lencioni, 2010) . This culture of direct and caring
conflict allows for decision makers to access better information and, thus, enables them
to make better, more informed decisions for the benefit of the organization. A culture of
candor is needed in order for a culture to maintain an ongoing state of innovation
(Catmull, 2014).
Organizational Context and Mission
The International School for Expatriates (ISE) [pseudonym] is committed to being
a world leader in education by creating personalized learning paths that enables students
to learn at high levels. The International School for Expatriates is one of the largest
international schools in the world. The school serves 49 nationalities, 62% of whom hold
passports from the United States (School Website, 2017). It is a Western Association of
Schools and Colleges (WASC) accredited school that serves preschool to grade 12
students on one campus. It is a high performing school with 91% of the population
attending college directly upon finishing high school, while 7% serves in national service
(obligatory military training), and 2% takes a gap year. In 2016, 96% of Advanced
Placement Exams taken by high school students scored a 3 or higher, while 74% scored
either or a 4 or 5, well outstripping the mean scores in the United States (US) on all tests
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
15

taken. Standard Achievement Tests (SAT) for the same cohort also outperformed the
SAT 2015 world mean scores in all areas (School Profile for Colleges, 2017).
In spite of high achievement and a tradition of academic success, the organization
is faced with an increasingly competitive environment for expatriate student
enrollment. Expatriate packages have been reduced; hiring practices of expatriates for
international positions in corporations have changed resulting in a reduction of high end
offerings (Budden, 2014). In addition, more international schools have been established
(Sharma, 2016). The result has been an increase in competition in the international
school landscape, and a decrease in enrollment for many well established international
schools.
The International School for Expatriates has not suffered loss in enrollment but is
conscious of the need to retain relevance. The institution is consistently adapting to the
ever-changing needs of students in order to remain competitive. It is dedicated to
ongoing innovation and personalized learning for all students (School Admissions Guide,
2017). As such, the school has a series of deep-seeded educational reforms slated to be in
place by 2020. In order to effect this change, the Superintendent stated the professional
pivots that would form the underpinnings of the culture are needed to implement this
reform (see Table 1.2).
Organizational Goal
The goal of ISE is to create an organizational culture of radical candor that will
allow for the continued innovation that is necessary for the school achieve its
mission. The superintendent made explicit the professional pivots that will lay a cultural
foundation for the ongoing innovation needed to achieve the goal. The techniques and
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
16

Table 1.2. Professional pivots of ISE
Professional Pivots
From compliance to dialogue
From positional leadership to distributed leadership
From unplanned instances of creativity to disciplined and systemic innovation
From episodic evaluation to frequent, immediate, and meaningful feedback
From instincts to research-based practices
From perfection to growth
From comfortable to uncomfortable
From frenzied to focused

(Personal communication to all staff, ISE President, August 1, 2016.)

principles of radical candor provide guidance to the professional pivots directed by the
Superintendent in 2016. Table 1.3 illustrates the manner in which the professional pivots
fall into the explicit radical candor categories of “challenge directly” (feedback) or “care
personally” (compassion). Both categories are based on the foundation of an
organizational structure of distributed leadership.

Table 1.3. Professional pivots in the radical candor framework
Challenge Directly (Feedback) Care Personally (Compassion)
From compliance to dialogue From perfection to growth
From unplanned instances of creativity to disciplined
and systemic innovation
From frenzied to focused
From instincts to research-based practices
From comfortable to uncomfortable
From positional to distributed leadership

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
17

Description of Stakeholder Groups
The main stakeholders in implementing a culture of candor are: school
administration, teacher leaders, teachers, Instructional Assistants (IAs), community
members, and students. The three main stakeholders responsible for this cultural change
are school administrators, teacher leaders, and teachers. School administrators include
the directors of the central office, principals, and vice principals. Teacher leaders are
Professional Learning Community (PLC) leaders in the distributed leadership model of
the school. If teacher leaders do not engage in candor, then the PLCs with which they
work may be silent in regard to challenges faced by the educational reform slated for the
school. Teachers are all PLC members and also play a central role between student and
community voice. If PLCs are not able to engage in Radical Candor, then it is unlikely
that the school goal of high levels of learning for all students and personalized learning
for all students will be achieved. Instructional Assistants will also play a role in the PLC
conversations around candor. If the school is unsuccessful at implementing reform, it is
very likely that enrolment, and thus funding will be negatively affected.
Stakeholder Performance Goals
Stakeholder performance goals are those that contribute to the organization goal
Table 1.4 provides a description of the organizational mission, global and stakeholder
performance goals. The goals are framed within the mission of the organization, to be a
world leader in education by creating personalized learning paths allowing all students to
learn at high levels.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
18

Table 1.4. Organizational mission, global goal, and stakeholder performance goals
Organizational Mission
The International School for Expatriates is committed to being a world leader in education by creating
personalized learning paths allowing all students to learn at high levels.

Organizational Performance Goal
The goal of ISE is to create an organizational culture of radical candor that will allow for the continued
innovation necessary for the school to fulfill its mission.
Administrator Goal Teacher Leaders Teacher Goal Instructional Assistant
Goal
By December 2018,
100% of
Administrators will
model behaviors and
reinforce a culture of
radical candor.
By November 2018,
100% of Teacher Leaders
will model the techniques
of Radical Candor within
their respective PLC
groups, and with their
Instructional Assistants.
By November 2018,
100% of Teachers will
model the techniques of
radical candor during
conversations regarding
student outcomes.
By November 2018,
100% of Instructional
Assistants model the
techniques of radical
candor during
conversations regarding
student outcomes .

Stakeholder Group Selected for the Study
While a change of culture related to candor requires the active participation of all
stakeholders, the key stakeholders in this study were the teacher leaders. The reason for
this is that the professional pivots of the organization from positional to distributed
leadership use teacher leaders as the key in the distributed model. Teacher leaders have
direct impact on team culture, and in so doing create patterns among teachers. The
teachers are the central spoke of the organization, as they interact not only among
themselves and with Administration, but also are the central spoke of contact for IAs,
students, and parents. The stakeholders’ goal is that all teacher leaders will model
techniques of radical candor (Scott, 2017) by December 2018. Failure to accomplish this
goal may lead to ambiguity around the professional pivots meant to underpin the change
initiative of the school. This ambiguity could lead to failed change initiatives. Failure of
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
19

the implementation of the change initiative would result in the inability of the
organization to achieve its mission, and the likely drop in enrollment, and thus funding
for the future development of the school.
Purpose and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to examine the knowledge, motivation and
organizational factors that contribute to the stakeholder (teacher leaders) being able to
achieve their performance goal of implementing radical candor and, thereby, contributing
to a culture that embraces the professional pivots established by administration for the
successful implementation of the 2020 change initiative.
1. To what extent are the teacher leaders reaching their goal of 100% of teacher
leaders demonstrate that they engage in radical candor?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences needed for
100% of teacher leaders to model radical candor?
3. What are the recommendations for improving the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences needed for 100% of teacher leaders to model radical
candor?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
The conceptual and methodological framework of this study was that of gap
analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008). This framework was selected due to its transferability to
applied organizational problems. The gap analysis first identifies the organizational goal,
followed by the main stakeholders needed to achieve that goal. The knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences (KMO) of those stakeholders are studied to
understand deeply what is need in order for the organization to reach its goal. KMO was
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
20

assessed by utilizing the literature review, surveys, interviews, and
observations. Research-based solutions were evaluated and recommended.
Definition of Terms
The following terms were defined for the study:
Compassion: “[Compassion] involves offering others patience, kindness and
nonjudgmental understanding, recognizing that all humans are imperfect and make
mistakes. Similarly, self-compassion involves being open to and moved by one’s own
suffering, experiencing feelings of caring and kindness toward oneself, taking an
understanding, nonjudgmental attitude toward one’s inadequacies and failures, and
recognizing that one’s own experience is part of the common human experience” (Neff,
2003, p. 224).
Conflict: “...the process which begins when one party perceives that another has
frustrated, or is about to frustrate some concern of his” (Thomas, 1992, p. 265).
Organizational Silence: “...widespread withholding of input by employees, who
collectively perceive speaking up as dangerous or futile” (Morrison & Milliken, 2003, p.
1,354).
Radical Candor: “... proactive and compassionate engagement in [the] unpleasant and
direct feedback process” (Vich & Kim, 2016, p. 12).
Organization of the Dissertation
The first chapter provides background information around the opposing concepts
of organizational silence and candor and their role in managing the conflict inherent in
organizational innovation and change. The first part of the gap analysis model was
introduced: the organizational mission, goals, main stakeholders, and the project
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
21

design. The second chapter delineates a review of the literature around the KMO needed
in order to implement a culture of candor within the organization. The third chapter
describes the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences to be studied, as well
as the methods employed. The third chapter discusses the methodology used to conduct
the research. The fourth chapter presents the findings. The last chapter provides a
summary of the findings, limitations, and recommendations for practice as well as for
future study.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
22

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
This study was conducted to provide practical recommendations for ISE to use to
create and enhance a culture of candor for diverse groups in light of the need for ongoing
innovation. This chapter provides a literature base for understanding of the stakeholder
knowledge, motivation, and organizational behaviors needed in order to implement a
culture of radical candor in the International School of Expatriates.
General Problem of Practice
This study addressed three main questions within the context of the International
School for Expatriates:
1. To what extent are the teacher leaders reaching their goal of 100% of teacher
leaders demonstrate that they engage in radical candor?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences needed for
100% of teacher leaders to model radical candor?
3. What are the recommendations for improving the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences needed for 100% of teacher leaders to model radical
candor?
A flowchart of the problem studied is provided in Figure 2.1. The flowchart
begins with the organizational goal, and continues to the research methods, identification
of the gap, the causes for the gap in the areas of knowledge, motivation, and
organizational behaviors, and culminates in actionable and measurable recommendations.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
23

Figure 2.1. Flowchart delineating the study

The purpose of analyzing the organizational problem by dividing it into the three
separate categories of knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors (KMO) was to
better understand root causes of the problem before seeking solutions (Clark & Estes,
2008). When analyzing the KMO, it is also important to look below the surface of each
category, and analyze the types of knowledge, motivation or organizational behaviors
that may be affecting the ability of the institution to achieve its goal, as the solutions for
each of the three categories are different (Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Radical candor is the intersection of two axes: care personally (compassion) and
challenge directly (feedback) (Kim & Vich, 2016; Scott, 2017). For this reason, this
study analyzed the KMO needed for compassion, feedback, and the intersection of the
two axes, radical candor.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
24

Knowledge and skills
It is important to analyze the knowledge of stakeholders around candor, as
learning can lead to a change in attitude, knowledge, beliefs, and behaviors (Ambrose, et.
al., 2010). If a stakeholder does not know what radical candor is, for example, it makes
no sense to measure his motivation to implement it nor the organizational barriers that
might impede him from using it. For this reason, stakeholder knowledge related to
candor was first identified.
General theory. Learning is a process which has the capacity to improve
performance, change attitude, knowledge, beliefs and behaviors as well as enhance future
learning (Ambrose, 2010). In order to effectively understand the learning that will be
needed to meet the goal it will be important to understand the hierarchy of
knowledge. Krawthwohl (2002) divided learning into four categories, from the simplest
and least transformative to the most complex and transformative forms: factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive.
Factual knowledge is the simplest form of recall of information (Krawthwohl,
2002). Conceptual knowledge is slightly more sophisticated than factual knowledge.
Requiring a base of factual knowledge, a stakeholder with conceptual knowledge can
explain the basics of how something works (Krawthwohl). As the density of connections
around the topic may not be high at the beginning, creating a structure or framework in
which learners can apply knowledge to a new setting will be important (Ambrose, 2010).
The depth of the procedural knowledge depends largely upon the cognitive process
dimension with which the procedural knowledge intersects (Krawthwohl,
2002). According to Krawthwohl, the cognitive process dimension of “apply” is the
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
25

ability to carry out a given procedure in a specific situation. Metacognition is the highest
level of knowledge in Krawthwohl’s design. Metacognition is knowledge about
knowledge and includes self knowledge (Baker, 2016).
Assumed factual knowledge influences/needs. In order to assess the factual
knowledge needed to implement radical candor, it is important to understand the
knowledge needed to address feedback, compassion, and the overarching goal of radical
candor.
Teacher leaders need to identify types of feedback. Teacher leaders need to be
able to identify different types of feedback, and those that lead to positive results as well
as those that are ineffective. Considering that teacher leaders within PLCs are working
with self directed goals, the most effective types of feedback would have the following
qualities:
• Timely feedback is feedback that is provided as a person needs it in order to reach
the goal; the opposite would be feedback that is provided in a summative manner
(such as a performance appraisal), or too late to affect the attainment of the goal
(Ashfords & Cummings, 1983; DeNisi & Kluger, 1998).
• Specific feedback is related to the goal and is often related to measurable
results. Even if the feedback is positive, it is still very specific (Scott, 2017), as
non-specific positive feedback can be perceived as controlling or manipulative
(DeNisi & Kluger, 1998).
• Constructive feedback is about what a person does, not who a person is (Baron,
1988; Scott, 2017). It is very hard, if not impossible for a person to change
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
26

inherent personality traits, but a behavior is something that can be identified and
changed (Buckingham & Coffman, 2014).
In summary, feedback must be timely (Ashford & Cummings, 1983; DeNisi & Kluger,
1988), specific (Scott, 2017), and focused on measurable goals rather than on the
personality of an individual (Baron, 1998).
Teacher leaders need to identify different types of compassion, such as self-
compassion and compassion for others (Gilbert, 2014; Neff, 2003). Self compassion is
the ability to accept imperfections and less than ideal results in oneself as part of the
human condition (Gilbert, 2014). Self compassion is an underlying construct that allows
a person to admit mistakes or errors. The ability to admit mistakes enables a teacher
leader to create a culture that is able to follow suit (Scott, 2017). The understanding and
acceptance of the fallibility of others, or compassion for others, does not mean that a
leader simply accept low results. Instead, the recognition of the fallibility of all humans
is also a recognition of strengths, and as such, directs a leader to place team members in
situations where individuals can excel to their greatest potential (Buckingham &
Coffman, 2014).
Teacher leaders need to know the goal for the use of radical candor. In order to
ensure that the organization is able to meet the goal of a culture of candor, the main
stakeholders (teacher leaders) need to know the organizational goal for using radical
candor (Clark & Estes, 2008). A meta-analysis of the research on goal setting (Latham
et. al, 1981) found that in 90% of the studies, goals that were specific and challenging led
to higher performance than the absence of goals or vague goals. A description of a
vague goal was ‘just do your best’.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
27

Assumed conceptual knowledge influences/needs. In order to assess the
conceptual knowledge needs to implement radical candor, it is important to understand
how basic knowledge around feedback, compassion, and radical candor can be explained
within the cultural context of the team.
Teacher leaders need to describe the psychological safety constructs of
teams. In order for a teacher leader to be able to predict possible responses to feedback,
it is important to identify the psychological construct of the individual and team, and in
so doing, understand the probable response to feedback. For example, it is important to
identify teams working from a competitive model, a collaborative model, a care-giving,
or a care-eliciting model (Thomas, 1992). This factual knowledge provides words to
engage in conversation around the basic underpinnings of the way the team or individual
operates, and in so doing help prevent the deflection or negative consequences of
feedback.
Teacher leaders need to identify ratings of self compassion. Kim and Vich
(2016) identified the need for self compassion as an underlying principle of radical
candor. Self compassion allows an individual to put personal mistakes within the a
context of a shared human experience. A person with self compassion is able to admit
mistakes and continue to grow, whereas a person with low levels of self compassion may
experience isolation or depression upon recognizing a mistake or failure (Neff,
2013). Neff provided an instrument and a scale by which to understand self
compassion. The scale draws on 3 pairs of constructs to define self compassion: an
understanding of common humanity as contrasted with isolation, mindfulness as
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
28

contrasted with over-identification of a problem, and self kindness in contrasted with self
judgement.
Teacher leaders need to understand the relationship between the concepts of
self compassion, compassion for others and feedback. In order for a teacher leader to be
able to engage in compassion for others, it is important for the leader to first know what
compassion for others and self compassion entails. Team members need to know that
their leaders care for them (have compassion); when people know that their leaders care,
productivity increases (Conchie & Roth, 2009). Compassion for others is first based in
compassion for oneself. Compassion is the patient, kind and non-judgmental
understanding that humans make mistakes (Neff, 2003). Compassion for oneself makes
it possible to admit to mistakes. Compassion for others creates a growth mindset that
enables a leader to look for ways to best use the strengths of team members to the benefit
of the team goal (Buckingham & Coffman, 2014).
The intersection of feedback with compassion, or in Scott’s (2017) terms, direct
challenge intersected with personal care, enables one to engage in conversations with the
aim to build people and teams. Many may consider challenge directly as destructive, yet
at times direct challenge is needed in order to help a colleague or friend reach the next
highest level of personal capability (Scott, 2017).
Assumed procedural knowledge influences/needs. In order to assess the
procedural knowledge for the implementation of pradical candor, it is important to
understand the ability of participants to engage in the use of feedback, compassion, and
then ultimately, in the overarching concept of radical candor.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
29

Teacher leaders need to know how to engage in feedback. Teacher leaders need
to have procedural knowledge of how to engage in feedback. It is important for teacher
leaders to first know how to solicit feedback from team members, including the shy or
quiet team members. Lipton & Wellman (2011) presented several practical means of
ensuring engagement of team members, including providing time for individuals to first
think by writing on cards, then by talking in pairs or small groups, followed finally by a
larger group discussion.
Teacher leaders need to know how to give effective feedback to others (DeNisi
& Kluger, 1996). It is important that teacher leaders are able to distinguish effective
from harmful feedback. Feedback should be timely and related to goals, not the inherent
attributes of the individual (DeNisi & Kluger).
Teacher leaders can explain the steps to creating an effective meeting. The PLC
meeting serves as the main platform for professional learning within the distributed
leadership plan. As such, the PLC meeting provides the most likely context for a shift in
culture of the school around radical candor. According to Merril, 2002, the five steps to
effectively passing on knowledge in meetings are as follows:
1. Present the new knowledge in the context of a real-life problem
2. Activate existing knowledge
3. Demonstrate what is to be learned
4. Provide opportunity to practice
5. Provide techniques to transfer or integrate knowledge into a new context
Teacher leaders need to know how to lead with compassion. Team leaders who
admit mistakes and ask questions have more successful teams (Edmonson, 1999). For
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
30

this reason, first it is important that a team leader knows how to admit her own
shortcomings. This recognition of a leader’s own shortcomings creates an environment
in which mistakes are recognized more openly, and lay the foundation for the team to be
open. Second, it is important that team leader knows how to deal compassionately with
the mistakes of others. Part of this compassion involves helping to remove barriers to the
success of the individual in meeting the team goal (Clark & Estes, 2008), and the other
part involves recognizing a person’s strengths and operating from the position of
strengths rather than weaknesses in order to build the potential of the individual and the
team (Buckingham & Coffman, 2014).
Teacher leaders need to know how to engage in radical candor. In order to
ensure the intersection of the two axes of compassion and feedback for the team, it is
important to ensure that teacher leaders know how to create meeting agendas and conduct
meetings that contribute to a culture of candor around the topics that need to be
addressed. In order for meetings to be productive, they need to be designed to be
inclusive and involve all team members, and they will need to be planned in a way that
allows for the maximum learning of all participants (Lipton & Wellman, 2011). Merrill
(2002) presented a plan for maximum learning of a new skill. For the purpose of the
application of radical candor, Merrill’s construct is described as follows:
1. Present the need for candor in the context of the team and the school.
2. Activate existing knowledge regarding candor
3. Demonstrate candor by seeking feedback and demonstrating appropriate response
4. Provide the opportunity to practice candor
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
31

5. Provide techniques to transfer the understanding of candor outside of the context
of the meeting.
It is important to know that teachers can create team agendas with Merrill’s five
steps and that they can guide their team through each stage. When Merrill’s construct is
combined with Lipton and Wellman’s (2011) advice on how to solicit the involvement of
all team members, it is important that teacher leaders know at which points of these 5
steps to allow for quiet reflection, small group conversation, and whole group
conversation.
Assumed metacognitive influences/needs. In order to assess the metacognitive
needs to implement radical candor, it is important to provide participants with the
opportunity to reflect on the use of feedback, compassion, and radical candor.
Teacher leaders reflect on areas of strength and growth in the use of
feedback. Teacher leaders need to have the opportunity to reflect on the use of feedback
within the team. It is important for the teacher leader to first recognize the feedback from
the team for her own personal areas of growth, then share back with the team the steps
she or he is taking to improve in those areas. The teacher leader needs to reflect on the
delivery of feedback among the team. Some leading questions are:
• How was feedback received?
• How should feedback be improved?
• How did people receive the feedback, constructively, defensively, or in a passive
aggressive manner?
• Are all team members able to engage in feedback?
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
32

• How might one take into account different personalities or cultural backgrounds
in order to allow for differentiation of how feedback might occur?
Teacher leaders reflect on areas of strength and growth in the use of
compassion. Teacher leaders need the opportunity to reflect on self compassion and
compassion for others. Reflection on compassion involves understanding the culture of
the team and its ability to engage in difficult conversations without shirking from the
unpleasant aspects of personal or team results. A few questions that might prompt this
reflection are:
• Are you (as teacher leader) able to receive feedback from colleagues?
• What did you learn from the feedback?
• What have you changed as a result of the feedback?
• Is the team accepting of the shortcomings of others?
• How does the team manage the shortcomings of members in light of the team
goal?
• How does the team leverage the strengths of members in light of the team goal?
Teacher leaders reflect on the use of candor as a team and as an
organization. Radical candor is a team goal as well as an organizational goal. For this
reason, it is important to provide the opportunity for teacher leaders to reflect on radical
candor within the context of the team and across teams. While gaining trust within a
team may be complicated, gaining trust to engage in candor across teams within an
organization is more complicated. Some important guiding questions to understand the
use of radical candor within the organization may be:
• Describe the interactions of your team in terms of the radical candor quadrants.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
33

• Describe the interactions between teams in terms of the radical candor quadrants.
• Describe the interactions between levels of hierarchy in terms of the radical
candor quadrants.
Summary of the Knowledge Needs for Feedback, Compassion, and Radical
Candor. A summary of the knowledge needed by teacher leaders in order to engage in
creating a culture of feedback, compassion, and the intersection of the two, radical candor
is presented in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1. Assumed knowledge needs for the implementation of radical candor
Knowledge Type Feedback Compassion Organizational Goal of Candor
Factual Identify types of feedback
(Ashford & Cummings, 1983;
Baron, 1988; Buckingham &
Coffman, 2014; DeNisi &
Kluger, 1996; Scott, 2017)
Identify types of
compassion
(Buckingham &
Coffman, 2014; Gilbert,
2014; Neff, 2003; Scott,
2017)
Know the goal for the use of
radical candor (Clark & Estes,
2008; Latham, et. al, 1981)
Conceptual Describe the psychological
safety constructs of the team
(Thomas, 1992)
Identify rating of self
compassion (Kim &
Vich, 2016; Neff, 2003;
Scott, 2017)
Draw connections between
compassion and feedback (Kim
& Vich, 2016; Scott, 2017)
Procedural How to provide effective
feedback DeNisi & Kluger,
1996; Scott, 2017);
How to facilitate a meeting for
feedback
(Merrill, 2002);
How to solicit feedback from
colleagues
(Lipton & Wellman, 2011;
Merrill, 2002)
How to provide
colleagues with measures
of self compassion &
provide time for
discussion
(Buckingham &
Coffman, 2014;
Edmonson, 1999; Clark
& Estes, 2008)
How to engage in radical
candor
(Lipton & Wellman, 2011;
Merrill, 2002)
Metacognitive Reflect on areas of strength and
growth within feedback
discussions for self and team
(Schein, 2004)
Reflect on areas of
strength and growth
within compassion & self
compassion for self and
team (Neff, 2003)
Know the implications of
candor for the team &
organizational goals (Schein,
2004)

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
34

Motivation
It is important to analyze the motivation of stakeholders in implementing radical
candor. Stakeholders may know, or even be experts in radical candor, but may decide not
to engage in it for a variety of motivational causes. This section delineates the theory of
motivational research and applies it to the need to implement radical candor in an
educational setting.
General theory. There are some that may argue that the economic rewards of
good work should be sufficient a carrot to ensure high quality implementation of new
initiatives or programs. However, one of the difficulties of this paradigm lies in the
nature of the work to be completed in a knowledge-based economy; there is a difference
between explicit and tacit knowledge. Explicit knowledge may be calculated and
remunerated, but tacit knowledge, the knowledge set that often provides a value-added
set to an organization is not easy to identify nor assign a dollar value (Frey & Osterloh,
2000). While extrinsic motivation such as remuneration does play a part in the
motivation of employees, this study will focus mainly on the intrinsic factors of
motivation of an individual in implementing radical candor. The reason for such a
decision is that while extrinsic factors such as monetary compensation do play a role in
motivation, the implementation of radical candor will require a high degree of tacit
knowledge on the part of each team leader. Teams and individuals dealing with high
levels of tacit knowledge (or knowledge that cannot be engineered as with explicit
knowledge) perform best under intrinsic models of motivation (Frey & Osterloh, 2000).
Many motivational factors have a base in beliefs. The belief a person has about
his own ability to achieve a task will have an affect on his achievement (Rueda, 2011). A
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
35

stakeholder’s belief about whether or not he has control over a task will also affect his
level of involvement and achievement (Anderman & Anderman, 2011). Whether or not a
stakeholder values the initiative, her part in the initiative, the practicality of the
implementation of the initiative or the overall cost versus benefit of the initiative all play
a role in her level of engagement, and thus success of the goal (Eccles, 2009). Knowing
if individual stakeholders are motivated by the desire to learn for the sake of learning or
for recognition for accomplishing the goal can be important in the ongoing
implementation of the goal. It is for these reasons that Rueda (2011) divided motivation
into four categories: self efficacy, attributions, values, and goal orientation.
Assumed self-efficacy influences. According to Rueda (2011), self efficacy is
related to one’s belief of his own ability to accomplish the task at hand. Self efficacy
plays an important role in the achievement of goals.
Teacher leaders are confident in their ability to engage in feedback. Individuals
are often reticent to give feedback for fear of a host of factors including social isolation,
sidelining, or reprisal (Milliken & Morrison, 2000). As a result of the stigma often
associated with feedback, and with the idea that feedback can be positive, neutral or
negative (DeNisi & Kluger, 1996), it would be logical to expect that not many will
automatically feel confident in the ability to engage in offering feedback.
Teacher leaders are confident in their ability to engage in self compassion, and
thus are open to feedback from others. Leaders often perceive that the ability to lead is
relegated to those that have all of the answers and make all of the right decisions
(Milliken & Morrison, 2000). The ability to engage in self compassion, and thus to be
open about one’s own mistakes runs counter to the belief that the leader must be all
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
36

knowing (Neff, 2003). It would be logical to assume that teacher leaders and
administrative leaders alike will need assurance in their ability engage in self compassion
while still retaining the trust of the team to move forward toward the goals. Ironically, it
has been found that team leaders who admit mistakes and ask a lot of questions tend to
lead the most effective teams (Edmonson, 1999).
Teacher leaders are confident in the team’s ability to engage in radical
candor. Teacher leaders can present and model radical candor personally, but the degree
to which the team engages in candor will determine the ability of the team to reach its
goals effectively. In diverse teams, cultural expectations can play into perceptions of the
acceptability of radical candor (Bassett-Jones, 2005; Scott, 2017). Differences of
hierarchy within a team can also play into how well the team might be able to embrace
candor (Milliken & Morrison, 2000).
Attributions. Attributions and control beliefs are related to whether or not a
person believes that the task at hand and the outcomes are within his own control
(Anderman & Anderman, 2011). A person who believes that outcomes are within his
own control is more likely to experience success at the task (Weiner, 1985). It is for this
reason that it is important to assess the teacher leaders’ beliefs about their own personal
ability to implement radical candor.
Teacher leaders believe that responsibility for feedback lies within self. Often,
in educational history, teacher feedback has been a once-a-year, half-hearted, summative
event (DeNisi & Kluger, 1996). However, it is unlikely that one supervisor will know the
work of a teacher as deeply as a teaching team. If teacher teams, or PLCs are to reach
maximum effectiveness, then it is important that teacher leaders understand that the
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
37

responsibility for feedback does not lie in a once-a-year appraisal event with
administration, but rather, that team goals are the responsibility of the team (DuFour,
2005). As team goals are the responsibility of the team, the responsibility to provide
feedback also lies within the team, and begins with the team leader.
Teacher leaders are able to extend compassion to others. The nature of the work
of teaching as affecting children may make it hard for some teachers to extend
compassion to other colleagues. Teacher leaders and teaching teams need to be able to
help colleagues remove knowledge barriers, address motivational concerns, and help
remove organizational obstacles to the success of indviduals and the team in the
achievement of its goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). The ability of a teacher leader to identify
strengths of colleagues and use those strengths to the benefit of the team will determine
the effectiveness of the team (Conchie & Rath, 2009).
Teacher leaders believe that the onus of radical candor within the organization
lies within oneself. Organizational leaders affected by culture of silence are a bit like the
emperor who was wearing no clothes (Milliken & Morrison, 2000). In the story of the
emperor, everyone was afraid to tell the emperor that he had no clothes, until finally a
child spoke out loud. In organizations, the responsibility of speaking out is with every
member of the organization and team, and begins with the teacher leaders. The ability to
measure a leader’s beliefs regarding responsibility for candor involves analyzing as many
factors of organizational structure, and differing types of diversity that may play into
one’s perception of his or her right to initiate candid conversations (Blackmon & Bowen,
2003).
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
38

Assumed value influences. Values are important to assess, because while a
stakeholder may know the concept of candor and believe in his ability to engage in it, he
may not place value on engaging in it for a variety of reasons. Eccles (2009) presented
different types of values that can influence a stakeholder’s achievement of a goal:
attainment (or importance) value, intrinsic value, and utility value.
Teacher leaders value feedback and perceive it to be in alignment with other
tasks on hand. A person with high intrinsic value around a task is a person who finds
that particular task enjoyable and meaningful (Eccles, 2009). The intrinsic value in this
study could be a particularly sticky issue, as people do not generally enjoy the process of
engaging in feedback (Kim & Vich, 2016). Another aspect of high intrinsic value,
however, is that said tasks are often relevant and in some way challenging to the learner;
tasks of high intrinsic value are based in personal motivation with high active choice in
how to complete the task (Eccles, 2009).
Teacher leaders value compassion and valued and perceive it to be in alignment
with other tasks on hand. In modern organizations, there are many initiatives that
compete for attention. The perception of the importance or usefulness of a task is known
as the utility value; there is a direct relationship between the utility value and the effort a
person is willing to put in to ensure the success of a goal (Pintrich, 1999). For this
reason, it is important to assess to what extent teacher leaders perceive compassion as of
value to them in their work.
Teacher leaders value radical and perceive it to be in alignment with other tasks
on hand. High intrinsic value needs to be attached to the results of radical candor rather
than the conversations themselves. For example, if an unpleasant conversation results in
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
39

better student achievement and a closer working relationship between colleagues, then
the high intrinsic value may be assigned to the result of the conversation rather than the
process of the conversation itself. Throughout the process of the implementation of
radical candor, the goal of the team needs to supersede the ego of the individual in order
to maintain high intrinsic value. The ego of the individual needs to lie in the success of
his team.
Goal orientation. A goal is something that someone wants to achieve (Locke &
Latham, 1990). According to Rueda (2011), while individuals can work simultaneously
on different goals, goals are more likely to be effectively adopted and invested in when
the separate goals are in alignment with each other. For this reason, it is important to
analyze the degree to which teacher leaders perceive radical candor as just one more
initiative or if it is perceived to be a tool to aide in the achievement of already stated
goals.
Teacher leaders believe that feedback will help to achieve the already
established goals. Feedback is often slated to the realm of administration as
“performance feedback” and is often summative in nature. However, the nature of an
effective PLC team requires attention to results (Lencioni, 2010). Within Lencioni’s
pyramid (2010), the ability to hold teammates to accountability, to effectively manage
conflict, and to demonstrate commitment to the goal are necessary aspects to a team
reaching a goal. In order to achieve the central aspects of Lencioni’s pyramid, it is
important that teacher leaders understand that feedback helps the team achieve its goals.
Teacher leaders believe that compassion will help achieve the already
established goals. Lencioni’s pyramid (2010) is based on trust. Part of the basis of trust
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
40

lies in compassion. Teacher leaders need to understand how compassion for self and the
ability to admit to mistakes will help the goal, rather than undermine their leadership
(Edmonson, 1999). Teacher leaders need to understand how compassion for others helps
the team by playing toward strengths rather than focusing on weaknesses of individuals
(Buckingham & Coffman, 2014).
Teacher leaders believe that a culture of radical candor will help achieve
organizational goals. Radical candor in many ways provides a scaffold to Lencioni’s
pyramid (2010) of effective teams. The compassion builds the trust of the team, while
the feedback provides the climb up the pyramid through conflict management, addressing
commitment, and teams holding each other to accountability for team goals.
Summary of motivational needs. Table 2.2 provides a juxtaposition of Rueda’s
four categories of motivation with the goals of organizational feedback, compassion, and
overall candor.
Assumed organizational influences
Assume for a moment that a stakeholder has all of the knowledge, skills, and
motivation to actively engage in radical candor in educational settings. If the organization
does not provide structures to allow for radical candor to occur, it is unlikely that stakeholders
will engage in the practice. The structures, practices, and culture of an organization can create
possibilities or can prohibit innovation from taking root (Catmull & Wallace, 2014; Schein,
2004).

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
41

Table 2.2. Assumed motivational needs for the implementation of candor
Assumed Motivational Causes Feedback Compassion Radical Candor
Self efficacy …are confident in their ability to engage in feedback, compassion, and radical
candor (Bassett-Jones, 2005; DeNisi & Kluger, 1996; Edmonson, 1999;
Milliken & Morrison, 2000; Neff, 2003; Rueda, 2011; Scott, 2017)
Attributions …believe that responsibility for the feedback, compassion and radical candor is
within oneself (Anderman & Anderman, 2011; Blackmon, 2003; Clark & Estes,
2008; Conchie & Rath, 2009; DeNisi & Kluger, 1996; DuFour, 2005; Eccles,
2009; Weiner, 1985)
Values …feedback, compassion, and radical candor are valued, and is perceived to be in
alignment with other tasks on hand (Blackmon & Bowen, 2003; Milliken &
Morrison, 2000)
Goal Orientation …believe that feedback, compassion and radical candor will help to achieve
already established goals (Allen, Poteat & Schockley, 2010; Ashford, Blatt &
Walle, 2003; DeNisi & Kluger, 1998; DuFour, 2005; Lencioni, 2010).

General theory. “Culture is deep, pervasive, complex, patterned, and morally
neutral” (Schein, 2004, p. 60). Schein (2004), analyzed organizational culture in three
main levels: artifacts, espoused beliefs and values and underlying assumptions. Artifacts
are the visible structures of the organization that are easily seen, but difficult to
understand or decipher. The espoused beliefs and values are the strategies, goals and
stated philosophy of the organization. The underlying assumptions are the unconscious,
implicit beliefs, thoughts or feelings in an organization around certain topics.
In the case of ISE, the goal for school culture was stated explicitly by the
Superintendent through the delineation of the professional pivots. One of the pivots
states specifically the need to change from positional to distributed leadership. One of
the artifacts, or visible structures of the school that align with this stated goal is the
increased emphasis placed on PLC leadership within teams. The need to explicitly state
the other pivots, such as “compliance to dialogue”, “comfortable to uncomfortable”,
“perfection to growth”, or “instincts to research based practices” provide a few examples
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
42

of areas in which the underlying assumptions or implicit beliefs of the school culture may
clash with the need for candor in order to sustain a culture of innovation.
There are several aspects of organizational culture that may have a negative
influence on a culture of candor within an organization. Some of the most poignant of
these reasons come from research on feedback from Morrison and Milliken
(2000). Morrison and Milliken proposed that people in organizations were unlikely to
provide unpleasant feedback to superiors for fear of reprisal, and the belief that feedback
wouldn’t make a difference. Much of the fear of feedback has root in the hierarchy of
competitive systems of power differences (Gilbert, 1992). As the hierarchical systems
themselves can play into managerial beliefs of superiority, management may experience a
reduced perception of the need to listen to and learn from those lower in rank (Morrison
& Milliken, 2000). Last, but not least, the psychological desire of an individual to fit in
socially often leads to set norms of politeness that avoid conflict (Kasper, 1990). The
ability to engage in candor and compassion is directly related to level of trust that has
been developed in the relationship. It is for this reason that the amount of time dedicated
to the relationship building process is also an important aspect of the organizational
structure in order to make it possible to implement candor. The security of the
relationship between supervisors and subordinates plays a role in the ability to an
effective working and learning environments (Beinart, Cooper, & Palomo, 2010; Berger,
2014). Supervisors that admitted mistakes and asked questions seemed to have teams
with higher levels of learning (Edmonson, 1999). The psychological safety of
stakeholders has a positive correlation with team learning and performance (Edmonson,
1999).
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
43

Deep organizational change of culture can be tricky; historically it has rarely
resulted in the desired results (Druckman, Singer, and Van Cott, 1997). Dixon (1994), as
cited by Clark and Estes (2008), and Hansen, Hansen, and Smith (2010), delineated
organizational factors that can positively influence the change process. The factors
influencing the ability of an organization to implement change can be summarized as
follows: (1) a clear, measurable, and well communicated goal; (2) management acts in
alignment with the goal; (3) the organization holds people accountable for results related
to the goal; (4) organizational structures support the goal; and (5) resources are allotted to
the attainment of the goal.
The organization communicates a clear, measurable, and well communicated
goal. The goal must be communicated clearly and repeatedly, the leadership must act in
alignment with the goal, incentives must be in line with the desired behaviors, and
resources must be allocated that provide support for the ongoing effort to evaluate and
achieve the goal (Clark & Estes, 2008; Kotter, 1998).
Leadership models and communicates the need to be candid in regard to team
goals. When stakeholders know what the goal is, the results toward the goal are better.
Latham, et. al., 1981). Leadership needs to ensure a variety of methods of
communication of the goal, such as community meetings, e-mails, teacher workshops,
and personal interactions.
Leadership models and communicates consistently the need to admit one’s own
mistakes and to be compassionate with the mistakes of others. Self-compassion and,
thus, the ability to admit mistakes (Neff, 2003) needs to be communicated by
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
44

leadership. Admitting mistakes often runs against survival in organizational culture, and
as such needs to be consistently communicated.
Leadership models and communicates consistently the need for radical candor
as a means of achieving organizational goals. Radical candor is directly related to the
ability of the team and organization to achieve its overarching goals (Lencioni, 2010;
Scott, 2017). Thus, school leadership needs to consistently communicate the relationship
between achieving goals and being candid about goals.
Management acts in alignment with the goal. If management says that radical
candor is important but does not model candor through the development of personal care
and direct challenge, then it is likely that the organization will be unsuccessful in
implementing a culture of candor. Morrison and Milliken (2000) outlined the main
reasons for organizational silence as being fear of reprisal or the belief that whatever was
said wouldn’t make a difference anyway. Scott (2017) in her description of radical candor
is also insistent on the need to meet regularly with stakeholders so as to form a
relationship and help remove barriers to the success of individual in meeting personal and
organizational goals.
Leadership listens without defensiveness. A defensive response from higher
levels of organizational leadership to a piece of radical candor will relay a message that
candor is not welcome and will not make a difference anyway. Defensiveness will result
in a decline in candid behavior (Milliken & Morrison, 2000).
Leadership reports back when changes are made as a result of candor. One of
the greatest reasons for organizational silence is the belief that radical candor will not
result in any organizational change (Milliken & Morrison, 2000). As such, it is important
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
45

to dispel this myth within a candid organization by letting people know what changes can
and will be made as a result of candor. The most effective changes are those that remove
knowledge, motivational, or organizational barriers for a team so that the team can
achieve its goal (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Leadership admits mistakes. Leadership needs to lead by example. Example is
more powerful than directives, and the unspoken behaviors of leaders often become
character traits of culture within an organization (Schein, 2004). A leader who is able to
admit mistakes and ask questions is more likely to have a highly effective team
(Edmonson, 1999).
Leadership builds relationships. Leaders who build relationships based upon
compassion and understanding of those who work for them have a better idea of the
strengths and goals of the individuals; thus, they are able to best use the talents of the
individuals for the good of the organization (Conchie & Rath, 2009). The trust developed
in the relationships is the basis of an effective team (Berger, 2010; Lencioni, 2010).
Leadership models radical candor before expecting it of others. What is
modelled by administration ends as being more important than what is said by
administration in creating culture (Schein, 2004). The degree to which the organization is
able to acquire a culture of radical candor is determined by the following abilities of the
leaders:
• build relationships of compassion and trust
• place employees in positions that best suit their strengths as opposed to focusing
on weaknesses
• admit mistakes
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
46

• remove KMO obstacles for stakeholders who engage in candor
The organization holds people accountable for results related to the
goal. Once the goal of radical candor is identified and presented to the teacher leaders, it
is important to hold stakeholders accountable to the goal (Hansen, Hansen, & Smith,
2002). In order to measure attainment of the goal, it is important to evaluate the
involvement in candor among individuals, within PLC groups, across PLC groups and
across the different layers of hierarchy within the school.
Stakeholders are held accountable for giving feedback to superiors, colleagues,
and team members. Teacher leaders need to know that complaints for the sake of
complaints about colleagues or policies are not appropriate, but rather direct and candid
feedback in regard to results are expected of all members of the organization.
Stakeholders are held accountable for being open about personal mistakes.
Teacher leaders should be able to relate personal mistakes in regard to the attainment of a
personal or team goal and what they have learned from it. The practice of learning from
mistakes is part of the practice needed for the innovation process (Catmull, 2014).
Stakeholders are held accountable for leveraging the strengths of colleagues
rather than focusing on the weaknesses. Teacher leaders should be aware of the
strengths of colleagues and should be able to share how those strengths play into the
overall success of the team (Conchie & Rath, 2009).
Stakeholders are held accountable for candor with colleagues, within teams,
across teams, and across the hierarchical levels of the organization. Scott (2017) and
Lencioni (2010) described how higher levels of management hold stakeholders
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
47

accountable for candor by maintaining focus on established goals and the results toward
those goals.
Incentives are in line with the desired behavior. Incentives for work behaviors
involving intrinsic motivation around tacit knowledge need to be planned carefully
(Hansen, Hansen, & Smith, 2002). While incentives are needed even for work that is
done with intrinsic motivation, incentives that are poorly planned or executed are likely
to backfire. Threats of not renewing contract or the promise of bonus money, for
example, are likely to turn intrinsic motivation into extrinsic. Recognition is not only
another type of incentive, but also needs to be planned carefully, as individuals react
differently to different types of recognition, and praise for certain groups over others may
result in resentment (Silverman, 2004). It is important to understand clearly exactly the
specific behaviors that are to be rewarded as well as the incentives that are preferred by
individuals (Silverman, 2004).
Stakeholders are rewarded by knowing how feedback made a difference. The
quiet recognition of a stakeholder’s efforts may be in the form a personal thank-you note,
a brief conversation, or in the form of a thank you at a team meeting (Silverman, 2004).
Stakeholders are rewarded for feedback by being given tasks to problem
solve. Part of understanding the strengths of others (Conchie & Rath, 2009) is placing
people strategically where they can best use their strengths. For many, one of the greatest
rewards for a job well done is to receive another problem to solve.
Stakeholders are rewarded by knowing how self compassion helped
others. Intrinsic motivation may be increased as a teacher leader understands how his or
her own vulnerability might help others to be open about areas of difficulty. This
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
48

intrinsic motivation may be increased even more so as results for students improve based
on this vulnerability.
Stakeholders are rewarded by being given tasks that will require innovation and
risk taking. When a teacher leader is vulnerable with a mistake and, therefore, is able to
correct it, he or she is well on a path that leads to innovation. One reward, for this
reason, is to be allowed more leeway for innovation and risk taking.
Stakeholders are rewarded for candor by acknowledgement of effective teams.
A servant leader (Greenleaf, 1977), would be the most pleased when her team is
recognized for their effort over her own personal part in the team. When the ego of the
individual is tied more closely to the success of the team than to oneself, it allows for a
highly functioning team.
Stakeholders are rewarded for candor in helping the organization reach its
goal. Rewards for candor should vary based upon the individual, but may include a thank
you note, a certificate of achievement, a ceremony with recognition in front of others, or
a personal token of appreciation (Silverman, 2004).
Resources need to support the attainment of the goal. The organization needs
to ensure that resources are aligned to the goal to allow for the research and training and
evaluation of the goal. The organization also needs to ensure that incentives are in place
to support the goal. Since this is a task involving high levels of tacit knowledge, the
incentives are not monetary. It is important to know the constituents personally enough
to know the type of reward that is most appropriate.
Funds and time are allotted to training, evaluation, and planning around
feedback. The Clark and Estes (2008) model of evaluation creates a formative study of
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
49

the needs of the organization. From this model, a backward plan which includes specific
recommendations of training, planning and evaluation is created. The time and resources
that need to be allotted based upon the specific needs of the organization for the
backward planning and evaluation (Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Summary of organizational factors affecting the implementation of radical
candor. The organizational factors affecting the implementation of radical candor are
listed in Table 2.3. It is important to note that if teachers or teacher leaders engage in
radical candor with supervisors, but are responded to with defensiveness, indifference,
social sidelining, or reprisal, then it is unlikely that a culture of candor will take root in
the school (Milliken & Morrison, 2000).
Conclusion
In order to implement a cultural change of radical candor within an organization,
it is important to identify the needs of the main stakeholders as delineated by the Clark
and Estes (2008) model. The Clark & Estes model identifies the needs of stakeholders in
three areas: the knowledge, the motivation and the organizational factors affecting their
success in attaining the goal. In order to fully implement a cultural change of radical
candor, it will be important to analyze both axes of the framework: “care personally”
(compassion) and “challenge directly” (feedback), as well as the intersection of both
axes, which results in radical candor (Scott, 2017). The methodology for validating these
factors are presented in Chapter 3.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
50

Table 2.3. Organizational factors in the implementation of radical candor
Organizational
Behavior
Feedback Compassion Organizational Goal of
Candor
Communication of
the measurable goal
Leadership communicates consistently the need to engage in candid feedback,
compassion for self and others, and radical candor (Latham, et. al., 1981; Neff, 2003;
Lencioni, 2017; Scott, 2017)
Leadership acts in
alignment with the
goal
Leadership listens without
defensiveness; leadership
reports changes made as a
result of candor (Clark &
Estes, 2008; Milliken &
Morrison, 2000)
Leadership admits mistakes;
leadership builds
relationships (Berger, 2014;
Conchie & Rath, 2009;
Edmonson, 1999; Schein,
2004)
Leadership models candor
before expecting it of
others (Clark & Estes,
2008; Schein, 2004)
The organization
holds people
accountable for
results related to the
goal
Stakeholders are held
accountable for giving
feedback to superiors,
colleagues, and team
members (Hansen, Hansen
& Smith, 2002)
Stakeholders are held
accountable for being open
about personal mistakes, and
for leveraging the strengths
of colleagues (Catmull,
2014; Conchie & Rath,
2009)
Stakeholders are held
accountable for candor
with colleagues, within
teams, across teams, and
across the hierarchical
levels of the organization
(Lencioni, 2010; Schein,
2004; Scott, 2017)
Incentives are aligned
with the desired
behaviors
Stakeholders are rewarded
by
*knowing how feedback
made a difference
*being given other tasks to
problem solve
(Conchie & Rath, 2009;
Silverman, 2004
Stakeholders are rewarded
by
*knowing how compassion
has helped others
*being given other tasks that
will require innovation and
risk taking
(Catmull, 2014)
Stakeholders are rewarded
by
*acknowledgement of
effective teams
*acknowledgement of
candor in helping the
organization reach its goal
(Greenleaf, 1977;
Silverman, 2004)

Resources support
goal attainment
Funds and time are allotted to training, evaluation, and planning

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
51

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this study was to examine how an organization (ISE) may
implement radical candor and, thereby, achieve a status of ongoing innovation in
education and reach organizational goals. In this study, teacher leaders were identified as
the main stakeholders needed to implement the goal. The study was guided by the
following research questions:
1. To what extent are teacher leaders reaching their goal of 100% of teacher leaders
demonstrate that they engage in radical candor?
2. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences needed for
100% of teacher leaders to model radical candor?
3. What are the recommendations for improving the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences needed for 100% of teacher leaders to model radical
candor?
Conceptual and Methodological Framework
The conceptual and methodological framework of this study was that of gap
analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008). This framework was selected because of its pragmatic
problem-solving approach to complex organizational issues. In the gap analysis
framework, the organizational goal and the stakeholders needed to fulfill the goal are
identified. The knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences (KMO) of those
stakeholders are then analyzed understand deeply what is needed for the organization to
reach its goal. The Kirkpatrick model (2016) was applied in this study to backward plan
a possible solution to fill the gap. Table 3.1 provides a summary of the KMO needed
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
52

Table 3.1. Summary of influences affecting the implementation of radical candor
Knowledge
Factual Identify types of feedback, compassion & goals for radical candor
Conceptual Identify how the team may respond to feedback, ratings of self-compassion, and
draw a connection between feedback and compassion
Procedural How to provide feedback, how to facilitate a feedback meeting, how to solicit
feedback, how to help colleagues understand ratings of self compassion, how to
engage in radical candor
Metacognitive Reflect on areas of strength and growth for feedback and compassion;
communicate the implications of candor in relation to the goal
Motivation
Self efficacy Confident in the ability to engage in feedback, compassion and radical candor
Attributions Believe that the responsibility for feedback, compassion and radical candor is
within oneself
Values feedback, compassion, and radical candor are valued and are perceived to be in
alignment with other tasks on hand
Goal Orientation believe that feedback, compassion, and radical candor will help to achieve
already established goals
Organizational Factors
Communication of
the measurable
goal
Leadership communicates consistently the need to engage in candid feedback
compassion for self and others, and radical candor
Alignment of the
goal
Leadership listens without defensiveness; leadership reports back when changes
are made as a result of candor; leadership admits mistakes and builds
relationships; leadership models candor
Incentives Stakeholders are rewarded through recognition or more responsibility
Resources Funds and time are allotted to training, evaluation, and planning

to achieve a cultural shift in the organization toward radical candor. A mixed methods
case study approach was applied which utilized surveys, interviews and document
analysis as appropriate to analyze the factors affecting the implementation of radical
candor.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
53

Assessment of Performance Influences
In order to understand an organizational problem, it is important to analyze the
knowledge, motivation and organizational behaviors that may contribute to the problem
(Clark & Estes, 2008). The summary of the possible influences affecting the
implementation of radical candor presented in Table 3.2 delineates the KMO of this
study. Each of these sections were addressed separately (by K, M, or O) to address the
means of assessment of each assumed factor influencing the organizational goal. Tables
3.2 – 3.5 provide a list of the assumed knowledge factors affecting the implementation of
radical candor and how that knowledge was assessed: (3.2) factual knowledge needs and
assessment; (3.3) conceptual knowledge needs and assessment; (3.4) procedural
knowledge needs and assessment; and (3.5) metacognitive knowledge needs and
assessment.

Table 3.2. Assumed factual knowledge needs and means of measurement
Factual Knowledge Survey Items Interview
Identify types of
feedback
Which of the following types of feedback
should a leader avoid?
Which of the following types of feedback
does a leader want to engage in?
Semistructured interview
allows participants to talk to
these points as addressing
higher level knowledge
constructs
Identify types of
compassion
What is self compassion?
What is compassion for others?
Identify organizational
goals for radical candor
What is the organizational goal for radical
candor?

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
54

Table 3.3. Assumed conceptual knowledge needs and means of measurement
Conceptual Knowledge Survey Items Interview
Identify how one’s team
may respond to feedback
How might one describe the culture of his team in
regard to receiving feedback. Is the team
competitive, cooperative, care-giving, or care-
seeking?
How might one expect team members to respond to
feedback, put down/ abused, feel unappreciated/
rejected, feel overwhelmed, or become unavailable/
withdrawn/ threatening?
Semistructured
interview allows
participants to talk to
these points as
addressing higher level
knowledge constructs
Understanding of one’s
own self compassion
On a sliding scale:
I am kind to myself.
I see my failings as something that happens to
everyone.
Draw connection
between feedback,
compassion, and identify
team behaviors
Which quadrant represents radical candor?
Which quadrant represents ruinous empathy?
Which quadrant represents manipulative
insincerity?
Which quadrant represents obnoxious aggression?
Which quadrant best characterizes your area of
comfort?
Which quadrant best characterizes your team?

Table 3.4. Assumed procedural knowledge needs and means of measurement
Procedural Knowledge Focus Group/ Document Analysis Interview
How to solicit feedback When planning a meeting agenda,
what do you do to ensure all
voices are heard in the meeting?
Compare with interview question:

What are the areas of growth for
your team around the idea of radical
candor?

(Leaders would first need to how to
identify the needs of the team.)
How to facilitate a feedback
meeting
When you need to bring new
knowledge or concepts to the
team, how do you organize the
meeting agenda? Why?
How to help colleagues
understand ratings of self-
compassion
How might you help colleagues
understand ratings of self
compassion?
How to implement candor How would you lead out a
meeting to facilitate the concept
of radical candor?

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
55

Table 3.5. Assumed metacognitive knowledge needs and means of measurement
Metacognitive
Knowledge
Interview Items Survey
Reflect on areas of
strength and growth for
feedback and compassion

What are the areas of strength in your
team around the idea of radical candor?
What are the areas of growth for your
team around the idea of radical candor?
How does the culture of the team around
radical candor affect your team goal?
Compare with survey questions
of conceptual knowledge of the
team. How does the team
resond to feedback? How do
leaders understand self-
compassion?
Communicate the
implications of candor in
relation to the goal
How does the culture of the school around
radical candor affect your team goal?
How does the culture of the school around
radical candor affect the school goals?
How do leaders connect
feedback and
compassion? How do leaders
identify team behaviors?

Tables 3.6 – 3.9 provide factors affecting the implementation of radical candor
and how the motivational needs of stakeholders were evaluated. The motivational needs
are: (3.6) self-efficacy; (3.7) attributions; (3.8) values; and (3.9) goal orientation.

Table 3.6. Assumed motivational needs regarding self-efficacy and means of
measurement

Self Efficacy Survey Items Interview
Confidence in the
ability to engage in
feedback and self-
compassion across
different levels of the
organization
On a sliding scale:
I feel confident in my ability to provide radically
candid feedback to members of my team.

I feel confident in my ability to provide radically
candid feedback to IAs or others who work under me.

I feel confident in my ability to provide radically
candid feedback to Administration or others who work
“above” me.

I feel confident in my ability to provide radically
candid feedback to other teachers in the leadership
cohort.
Compare with results
from interview
questions for
metacognitive
knowledge:

What are the areas of
strength in your team
around the idea of
radical candor?
What are the areas of
growth for your team
around the idea of
radical candor?
How does the culture
of the team around
radical candor affect
your team goal?

Confidence in the
ability of the team to
engage in feedback
On a sliding scale:
I feel confident that my team is able to give me
radically candid feedback.

I feel confident that my team has a culture of radical
candor.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
56

Table 3.7. Assumed motivational needs regarding attributions and means of
measurement

Attributions Survey Items Interview
Belief that the
responsibility for
feedback lies with
oneself
I believe that the responsibility for providing
feedback to members of my team is ultimately
with me.
I believe it is my responsibility to provide
feedback to Admin.
Semistructured interview
allows participants to talk
to these points as items
designed to address
metacognitive constructs
Ability to extend
compassion to others
When I am faced with the weaknesses of a team
member, I know how to leverage his strengths to
the benefit of the team.
Onus for candor
within teams
My team feels the responsibility to provide
feedback to each other.

Table 3.8. Assumed motivational needs regarding values and means of measurement
Values Survey Items Interview
Feedback is perceived to be
in alignment with other
tasks on hand
I value candid feedback to team members
because it will help us achieve our team
goals.
Semistructured interview
allows participants to talk
to these points as items
designed to address
metacognitive constructs
Compassion is perceived to
be in alignment with other
tasks on hand
I value compassion, and the ability to be
open about mistakes and imperfections,
because it will help us achieve our team
goals.
Radical Candor is perceived
to be in alignment with
other tasks on hand
I value a culture of radical candor because it
will help my team achieve our common goal

Table 3.9. Assumed motivational needs regarding goal orientation and means of
measurement

Goal Orientation Survey Items Interview
The belief that feedback,
compassion, and radical
candor will help to achieve
already established goals
Sliding scale:
I think a culture of radical
candor will help the school
achieve its 2020 goals.
How does the culture of the team around
radical candor affect your team goal?

How does the culture of the school around
radical candor affect your team goal?

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
57

Tables 3.10 – 3.13 provide a list of the organizational factors affecting the
implementation of radical candor and the means of assessing them regarding (3.10)
communication of the goal; (3.11) alignment of the goal; (3.12) incentives; and (3.13)
resources.

Table 3.10. Assumed organizational factors regarding communication of the goal and
means of measurement

Communication of the
goal
Survey Items Interview
Leadership
communicates the need
for candor
I know that ISE has a cultural goal of radical
candor because 1.) I heard about it from admin
informally, (2) I heard about it from admin in
formal settings, (3) I see it in written
communications from admin; and (4) I am not
sure that there is a formal goal of radical candor
Describe your understanding
of the culture of the
leadership team at the
school around the concept of
radical candor. (Is the goal
being modelled?)

Table 3.11. Assumed organizational factors regarding alignment of the goal and means of
measurement

Alignment of the goal Survey Items Interview
Leadership listens
without defensiveness
Sliding scale:
If I were to speak with Administration
about a problem, I would expect the
response to be defensive.
Describe a radically candid
interaction that you had or wanted to
have with Administration. What
happened?

Are there other issues that you
perceive to be important that you
would not discuss with
Admin? What are they? Why would
you not bring them up?
Leadership reports
back when changes are
made as a result of
candor
Sliding scale:
If I were to speak with Administration
about a problem, I am quite sure that
things would change for the better.
Leadership builds
relationships
Sliding scale:
I feel that the Administrators with whom
I work the most closely know how to
best leverage my strengths to the benefit
of the school.
Leadership admits
mistakes
Sliding scale:
Administrators at the school are open
about their mistakes.
Leadership models
candor
Sliding scale: Administrators model
radical candor.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
58

Table 3.12. Assumed organizational factors regarding incentives and means of
measurement

Incentives Survey Items Interview
Stakeholders are
rewarded for radical
candor
Sliding scale:
If I engage in radical candor with someone from Admin,, I
will most likely be rewarded in some way.
If I engage in radical candor with someone from Admin, I
will most likely receive a thank you note or a quiet
acknowledgement of some type.
If I engage in radical candor with someone from Admin, I
will probably be given more responsibility to problem
solve.
If I engage in radical candor with my team, my team will be
recognized for the good work we do.
Do you feel that
people are
rewarded for
radical candor at
ISE? Can you give
me an example of
why you feel this
way?

Table 3.13. Assumed organizational factors regarding resources and means of
measurement

Resources Document Analysis
Funds allotted to training, evaluation, and planning Analysis of calendar
Time allotted to training, evaluation, and planning Analysis of budget

Data Collection
Four types of data collection were utilized in this study: a survey, focus groups,
interviews, and document analysis. The results from each data collection method were
compared within the framework of the gap analysis to ensure the validity of the findings.
Sampling
The main stakeholders for this study were teacher leaders. Within ISE, there was
a self-selected leadership cohort (N=76) out of a total teaching faculty of =375. The
leadership cohort was created as a means of facilitating the distributed leadership
plan. The teacher leadership cohort was selected for this study because it has a unique
role in the culture of the school to flatten the hierarchical structure and to enable a culture
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
59

of educational innovation. Each member of the cohort was in a position of teacher
leadership. Thus, the leadership cohort provided a strong, self-selected sampling of
teacher leaders throughout the school.
Survey. The survey was sent by e-mail to all 76 teacher leaders. A total of 44
teacher leader began the survey; however, only 28 completed the entire survey.
Focus groups. All teacher leaders in attendance for the presentation of radical
candor (N=44) were invited to particpate in the focus group.
Interviews. Interviews were conducted for a total of 8 participants out of a
leadership cohort of N=76. The names of all 76 participants were printed out on paper.
The paper was cut into strips, each with the name of one of the participants. The names
were placed in a basket, and 20 names were randomly selected and recorded in order.
Potential interviewees were sent e-mails explaining the research and inviting them to
participate. For those who expressed willingness to participate, dates and meeting times
were arranged. Since not all randomly selected teacher leaders agreed to participate in
the interview, the researcher proceeded through the list of the 20 names drawn until 8
agreed to participate in the interviews.
Document analysis. Document analysis was used to understand the time and
resources allotted to building a culture of radical candor within the organization.
Documents were chosen by the administrative team and were shared with the researcher.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
60

Instrumentation
Instrumentation was created in order of the KMO assumed needs. Factual and
conceptual knowledge types, being less complex than procedural or metacognitive
knowledge types (Krawthwhol, 2002), were assessed primarily through the use of survey,
while procedural knowledge was evaluated through focus group and interviews, and
metacognitive knowledge was evaluated through interviews. The nature of the semi-
structured interview allowed for the triangulation of data between knowledge types, as
procedural and metacognitive knowledge requires a base of factual and conceptual
knowledge.
Motivational assumed influences were assessed primarily through survey, though
specific interview questions were also designed for goal orientation. The nature of the
interview questions for goal orientation also left room in the semi-structured interview for
participants to address assumed influences in the categories of self-efficacy, attributions,
and values.
Organizational factors influencing a culture of radical candor were assessed by
both survey and semi-structured interview so as to allow for the triangulation of data.
Due to the complexity of a large organization, the interviews focused mainly on
organizational factors in order to allow for hidden organizational barriers or successes to
rise to the surface that might have otherwise been unanticipated by the researcher.
Survey. The survey items were created in order of the KMO assumed needs.
Within the survey, each assumed influence had a corresponding question or list of
questions by which to evaluate the influence. Within the section of conceptual
understanding of self-compassion, the questions were modelled upon the instrument
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
61

created by Neff (2003), though none of her questions were used exactly as her work is
not to be duplicated. Table 3.14 provides the types of knowledge, assumed influences
and corresponding survey items. Tables 3.15 – 3.17 provide the types of motivation,
(self-efficacy, values, and goal orientation accordingly), and the assumed influences and
corresponding survey items. All motivation survey items were evaluated on a sliding
scale of 0 to 10.

Table 3.14. Knowledge survey items based upon assumed influence
Type of
Knowledge
Assumed Influence Corresponding Survey Items
Factual Identify types of
feedback
Which of the following types of feedback should a leader avoid?
Which of the following types of feedback does a leader want to
engage in?
Identify types of
compassion
What is self compassion?
What is compassion for others?
Identify
organizational goals
for radical candor
What is the organizational goal for radical candor?
Conceptual Identify how one’s
team may respond to
feedback
How might one describe the culture of his team in regard to
receiving feedback. Is the team competitive, cooperative, care-
giving, or care-seeking?
How might one expect team members to respond to feedback,
put down/ abused, feel unappreciated/ rejected, feel
overwhelmed, or become unavailable/ withdrawn/ threatening?
Understanding of
one’s own self
compassion
I am kind to myself.
I see my failings as something that happens to everyone.
Draw connection
between feedback,
compassion, and
identify team
behaviors
Which quadrant represents radical candor?
Which quadrant represents ruinous empathy?
Which quadrant represents manipulative insincerity?
Which quadrant represents obnoxious aggression?
Which quadrant best characterizes your area of comfort?
Which quadrant best characterizes your team?

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
62

Table 3.15. Assumed influence of self-efficacy
Assumed Influence (Self Efficacy) Corresponding Survey Items
Confidence in the ability to engage
in feedback and self-compassion
across different levels of the
organization
*I feel confident in my ability to provide radically candid feedback
to members of my team.
*I feel confident in my ability to provide radically candid feedback
to IAs or others who work under me.
*I feel confident in my ability to provide radically candid feedback
to Administration or others who work “above” me.
*I feel confident in my ability to provide radically candid feedback
to other teachers in the leadership cohort.
Confidence in the ability of the team
to engage in feedback
*I feel confident that my team is able to give me radically candid
feedback.
*I feel confident that my team has a culture of radical candor.
Belief that the responsibility for
feedback lies with oneself
*I believe that the responsibility for providing feedback to
members of my team is ultimately with me.
*I believe it is my responsibility to provide feedback to Admin.
Ability to extend compassion to
others
*When I am faced with the weaknesses of a team member, I know
how to leverage his strengths to the benefit of the team.
Onus for candor within teams *My team feels the responsibility to provide feedback to each
other.

Table 3.16. Assumed influence of values on motivation
Assumed Influence (Values) Corresponding Survey Items
Feedback in teams is valued. I value candid feedback to team members.
Compassion in teams is valued. I value compassion in teams.
Radical Candor is valued. I value a team culture of radical candor.

Table 3.17. Assumed influence of goal orientation on motivation
Assumed Influence (Goal Orientation) Corresponding Survey Items
The belief that feedback, compassion, and radical
candor will help to achieve already established
goals
I think a culture of radical candor will help the
school achieve its 2020 goals.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
63

The organizational factors measured in the survey were as follows: the
communication of the measurable goal, alignment of the goal, and incentives. The
assumed influences and corresponding survey items are presented in Tables 3.18 – 3.20:
(3.18) Communication of the measurable goal; (3.19) Alinhment of goal survey items;
and (3.20) Incentive survey items. A copy of the survey is provided in Appendix A.

Table 3.18. Communication of the measurable goal survey items based upon assumed
influence

Assumed Influence
(Communication of the
measurable goal)

Corresponding Survey Item (multiple choice)

Leadership communicates the
need for candor
I know that ISE has a cultural goal of radical candor because a.) I
heard about it from admin informally, b.) I heard about it from admin
in formal settings, c.) I see it in written communications from admin,
and d.) I am not sure that there is a formal goal of radical candor

Table 3.19. Alignment of the goal survey items based upon assumed influence

Assumed Influence (Alignment of
the goal)

Corresponding Survey Items (on a sliding scale)

Leadership listens without
defensiveness
If I were to speak with Administration about a problem, I would
expect the response to be defensive.

Leadership reports back when
changes are made as a result of
candor
If I were to speak with Administration about a problem, I am
quite sure that things would change for the better.

Leadership builds relationships I feel that the Administrators with whom I work the most closely
know how to best leverage my strengths to the benefit of the
school.

Leadership admits mistakes Administrators at the school are open about their mistakes.
Leadership models candor Administrators model radical candor.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
64

Table 3.20. Organizational factor: Incentive survey items based upon assumed influence

Assumed Influence (Incentives) Corresponding Survey Items (on a sliding scale)
Leadership listens without
defensiveness
If I were to speak with Administration about a problem, I
would expect the response to be defensive.

Leadership reports back when changes
are made as a result of candor
If I were to speak with Administration about a problem, I am
quite sure that things would change for the better.

Interview protocol. The semi-structured interview protocol was created to
triangulate procedural knowledge with the focus group data and to evaluate participants’
procedural and metacognitive knowledge. The evaluation of the procedural and
metacognitive knowledge in the interview led to the discovery of factual and conceptual
knowledge gaps due to the semi-structured interview process. Table 3.21 provides the
specific interview questions that correlate to the assumed influences of metacognitive
knowledge.

Table 3.21. Metacognitive interview items based upon assumed influence
Knowledge Type and Assumed Influences Interview Items
Procedural Knowledge:
How to provide feedback, how to facilitate a feedback
meeting, how to help colleagues understand ratings of
self compassion, how to engage in radical candor.
*How would you implement a culture of
radical candor in the group that you lead?
Metacognitive Knowledge: Reflect on areas of strength
and growth for feedback and compassion;
communicate the implications of candor in relation to
the goal
*What are the areas of strength in your team
around the idea of radical candor?
*What are the areas of growth for your team
around the idea of radical candor?

Table 3.22. Motivational interview items based upon assumed influence
Motivational
Assumed Influences
Interview Items
Goal Orientation: Believe that
feedback, compassion, and radical
candor will help to achieve already
established goals.
*How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect
your team goal?
*How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect
your team goal?
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
65

Table 3.23. Organizational factor interview items based upon assumed influence
Organizational
Factors
Assumed Influences Interview Items
Communication
of the measurable
goal
Leadership communicates the need for
candor
Describe your understanding of the
culture of the leadership team at the
school around the concept of radical
candor. (Is the goal being modelled?)
Alignment of the
goal
Leadership listens without
defensiveness
*Describe a radically candid interaction
that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
*Are there other issues that you perceive
to be important that you would not
discuss with Admin? What are
they? Why would you not bring them
up?
Leadership reports back when changes
are made as a result of candor
Leadership builds relationships
Leadership admits mistakes
Leadership models candor
Incentives Stakeholders are rewarded for radical
candor
Do you feel that people are rewarded for
radical candor at ISE? Can you give me
an example of why you feel this way?

Focus groups. The focus groups centered on the understandings of teacher
leaders around the procedural knowledge needed to implement a team culture of candor.
Table 3.24 presents the procedural knowledge assumed influences and the focus group
prompts. A copy of the focus group protocol is contained in Appendix C.
Recruitment, and Data Collection, and Analysis
Prior to conducting the study, the researcher contacted the Assistant
Superintendent of Schools to explain the research and request permission to work with
teacher leaders of ISE to conduct a 1½ hr workshop on radical candor. Permission was
granted, and the workshop was arranged during a pre-confirmed meeting with the group.
Prior to the meeting, the researcher provided informed consent forms to be signed
by the participants. The forms also described the study. The researcher also answered
questions on an individual basis with participants before the meeting began. During the
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
66

Table 3.24. Procedural knowledge influences and focus group prompts
Procedural Knowledge Assumed Influences Focus Group Prompts
How to solicit feedback How to esnure all voices are heard in meetings
How to facilitate a feedback meeting *How to present a new concept in meetings
*How leaders can model radical candor
*How to present the difference between harmful and
helpful feedback
How to help colleagues understand ratings of
self-compassion
How to create awareness of self compassion
How to implement a culture of candor How to share the concept of radical candor and why it
matters

meeting, the purpose of the research was explained to participants both in group and
individually. During the meeting, the researcher informed participants of the opportunity
to participate in focus groups as part of the meeting, as well as to participate in a survey
that would be disseminated at the end of the meeting to all teacher leader cohort members
by e-mail. Teacher leaders were also told that there would be a random sample of
participants drawn for one-to-one interviews, and that participation in the interviews,
while greatly appreciated, was voluntary.
The workshop provided information as to why radical candor mattered, what it
was, and how it might be implemented. Participants were given a scaffolding paper on
which to take notes and with which to reflect. They were also invited intermittedly to
think individually and then to work in groups of two to discuss the ideas. Appendix D
provides copies of the agenda of the workship, papers for note taking and reflection that
were distributed to participants in the session.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
67

Focus groups
The focus groups were conducted toward the end of the workshop on radical
candor. They were used to achieve understanding of the collective procedural knowledge
of the teacher leaders around how to run meetings that would enable radical candor. Six
large pieces of paper, each addressing specific prompts, were hung in different locations
about the room. Teachers were asked to break into groups of 3-4 participants. Each
group was given one marker so that the groups might discuss the ideas and write down
their collective thoughts. The six categories on the papers were:
• How to ensure all voices are heard in meetings
• How to present a new concept in meetings
• How leaders can model radical candor
• How to present the difference between harmful and helpful feedback
• How to create awareness of self compassion
• How to share the concept of radical candor and why it matters
Because of the large size of the group, a set of the six prompts were to each
teacher group which enabled the groups of teachers to move freely throughout the room
and to record their collective ideas without having to wait in line for access to a prompt.
Appendix E contains the papers that were generated during the gallery walk of the six
categories.
Once the papers were collected and organized by prompt, they were analyzed for
common or occuring themes as fitting the assumed influences of procedural knowledge.
Common themes were identified and recorded within the assumed influences and this
information was triangulated with the interview data. Generally, it was found that the
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
68

focus group provided information as to the collective knowledge of the group and that
this knowledge, while existing within the pool of teacher leaders, was not necessarily
common to all teacher leaders.
Surveys
An electronic survey via Survey Monkey was sent to all teacher leaders from the
cohort at the end of the meeting. The list of e-mails of the participants was provided by
the school administration. The beginning of the survey explained the purpose of the
study, that participation was voluntary, and that identity would be kept confidential. As
mentioned previously, the survey instrument is provided in Appendix A.
Of the 76 participants of the leadership cohort, only 18 teacher leaders originally
responded; therefore, a reminder e-mail was sent. At the end of two weeks, at which time
the researcher closed the survey, 44 teacher leaders had responded to the first three
questions of the survey. Of the 44 respondents, only 29 continued responding to a
majority of the questions. Thus, the completion rate was 38%. The average amount of
time taken on the survey was 9 minutes.
The results from the survey were then organized by KMO-assumed influences
and triangulated with interview data of the same KMO-assumed influences. Multiple
choice questions with 90% or more correct were considered to be valid. Sliding scale
results with a minimum of 8 out of 10 were also considered to be valid.
Interviews
The names of all teacher leaders were printed on a piece of paper, and each name
was cut on one strip. Twenty names on strips of paper were randomly selected from a
basket, and then placed in a list in order of selection. E-mail invitations were sent to the
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
69

first eight people selected in order of the drawing of the name. The e-mail invitation
once again explained the purpose of the study and that participation was voluntary. If
participants agreed to meet, calendar invitations were arranged, and meeting locations
were established. If a randomly selected teacher leader chose not to participate in the
interview, that person’s name was crossed off the list, and the next name on the list of 20
teachers was sent an e-mail. The researcher continued down the list of random selection
until 8 participants agreed to the interview. Sixteen people were invited and a total of 8
participants agreed to the interview. Most said that time was limited, and that they
regretted not being able to participate due to stressful time constraints.
For each interview, a quiet place was chosen according to the preference of the
interviewee. At the onset of each interview, the researcher once again explained the
purpose of the study, how the data would be used, that participation was voluntary, and
that identity would be kept strictly confidential. The researcher also requested
permission to take notes on the computer as the interviewee talked. Intermittently and at
the end of the interview, the researcher read back the notes written on the computer and
asked if what was written properly portrayed what the interviewee was wishing to
communicate. The researcher thanked the interviewees for participation. The interviews
generally lasted about 45 minutes.
Once all interviews were complete, the researcher sorted the data by KMO-
assumed influences and triangulated the data with the survey information. Trends within
the interviews were analyzed and noted. Some trends emerged that were not part of the
explicit questioning of the interview protocol. If 50% of the population voluntarily
brought forth a topic affecting the culture of candor at the school, then the information
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
70

was recorded in additional notes within the corresponding KMO charts. In situations
where the population was further divided by some other type of category, the 50% rule
was still applied. For example, two women mentioned that they felt that women did not
have voice within their own divisions, and one female interviewee expressed strong
feelings that the voices of minorities were not heard within the institution. Considering
that only 5 of the 8 interviewees were female, and three felt that their voice was not heard
for reasons of gender or ethnicity, this was considered to be more than 50% of the
corresponding population and was noted.
Document analysis
The researcher requested in person and by e-mail documents regarding the time
and financial resources allotted to the training of radical candor at ISE. Unfortunately,
she was unable to attain the documents. As such, she related her personal observation of
monies and time spent on training of the construct of radical candor, but was unable to
provide conclusive evidence for this item.
Trustworthiness of data
The data between surveys, interviews, and focus groups were triangulated to
ensure validity. Survey items for compassion were based on existing valid and reliable
instruments. Interview participants were provided the opportunity to clarify their
thoughts or comments.
Role of Investigator
As the principal researcher, I am a fellow faculty member in the organization who
has stepped down from my role in teacher leadership and was not enrolled in the
leadership cohort while conducting the study. As such, I had no personal or political
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
71

interests within the school regarding the collection of the data. The data of the individual
participants were kept strictly confidential and, as such, did not affect career
opportunities of participants within the school. My role of the researcher in this study
was to conduct an analysis of the culture of the organization regarding radical candor in
order to improve the capacity of the organization to sustain innovation.
While the members of the leadership cohort were self-selected to be in the group,
they were not inherently self-selected to participate in this study. As such, the
participants were offered the opportunity to opt out of providing feedback, participating
in group discussion, or answering the surveys. The findings and results are presented in
Chapter 4.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
72

CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS

This chapter presents the findings and results from the focus group, survey,
interviews and documents described in Chapter 3. The findings were organized into
sections reflecting the KMO needs of the organization for the implementation of radical
candor. The results of the survey, focus group, and document analysis each were placed
into tables that corresponded to the KMO assumed needs. The strengths and limitations
of each set of data collected will be discussed within the corresponding KMO sections.
The semi-structured interviews were analyzed by assumed influence and placed
into tables with the identification number of each interviewee. Once responses were
collected and recorded within the tables by interviewee number, responses were placed in
descending order. The top of the table signified the interview excerpts least indicative of
the assumed influence, whereas the bottom of the list signified the interview excerpts
most indicative of the assumed influence. The use of tables for interview data enabled the
researcher to analyze trends across the organization within the KMO framework while at
the same time respecting differences in participant voice.
Knowledge
The findings for the organizational needs for knowledge among key stakeholders
were organized by assumed influence, with the data for each collection tool presented,
followed by a summary regarding the validation of that influence.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
73

Assumed knowledge influence #1: Teacher leaders can identify types of feedback and
compassion. The ability of teacher leaders to identify types of feedback and compassion
was determined through surveys, one-on-one interviews, and document analysis resultant
of focus groups conversations.
Survey results. The first two questions of the survey addressed teacher leaders’
ability to identify feedback. Questions 3 and 4 addressed teacher leaders’ ability to
identify compassion. Table 4.1 provides the four questions and the breakdown of
responses of the teacher leaders.

Table 4.1. Teacher leaders can identify types of feedback and compassion

Survey Prompt

Multiple Choice Options
Response
(%)

N
Which of the following
types of feedback
should a leader avoid?
Feedback should not be about a person’s
personality traits.
61 44
Peer evaluation of teaching 4.5
Data comparison of how one group is doing
compared to another
4.5
All of the above 30
Which of the following
types of feedback does
a leader want to
engage in?
Goal related 0 29
Timely, so that a person can do something about it. 0
On-going 7
All of the above 93
Self compassion is Empathy 24 29
Forgiving others so as to feel better oneself 14
Understanding that everyone makes mistakes 59
Allowing for a lower standard for oneself 3
Compassion for others
as demonstrated by
leaders
Is admitting one’s own mistakes 0 29
Focuses on how to use strengths rather than the
weaknesses of team member
14
Recognizes that everyone has shortcomings 7
All of the above 79

The first question of the survey was “Which of the following types of feedback
should a leader avoid?” This particular question was designed to evaluate participants’
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
74

ability to identify good feedback. While 91% (the combination of participants who chose
items a and d), correctly understood that good feedback should not involve conversations
about personality traits, 40% (the combination of choices b, c, and d) felt that feedback
should not involve difficult conversations about pedagogy nor data comparisons. These
results indicated that interviewees understood what should be excluded from good
feedback: feedback should not include conversations about personality traits. The results
also indicated, however, that interviewees did not know what should be included in good
feedback: candid conversations based in data about the work that is being done, in this
case, pedagogy.
The second survey question asked, “Which of the following types of feedback
does a leader want to engage in?” Of the 29 participants who responded, 93% chose the
“all of the above option”, thus indicating that feedback should be goal related and timely
so that a person can do something about it, yet 40% felt that this should not be data
related nor should there be peer evaluation of pedagogy (as per question #1).
Question 3 was designed to see if teachers were able to separate general
definitions or understandings of the term “compassion” from the specific understanding
of compassion within the construct of radical candor. 59% were able to correctly identify
self-compassion as the understanding that everyone makes mistakes.
Question 4 was intended to see if teachers were able to identify the extension of
self-compassion to the compassion for others as demonstrated by a leader. 79% of
teacher leaders correctly identified “All of the above”, and in so doing, identified a
leader’s compassion for others as admitting a. one’s own mistakes, b. focusing on using
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
75

the strengths rather than the weaknesses of team members, and c. recognizing that all
have shortcomings.
Interview findings. Though interview questions were designed to address
procedural and metacognitive knowledge types, all interviewees asked for clarification of
the definition of radical candor either before beginning the interview process or at the
onset of the interview. For example, as the interview began, Interviewee #6 asked, “Can
you please explain radical candor?” While the survey was administered directly after a
session regarding radical candor while the ideas would still have been fresh in
participants’ minds, the interviews were conducted up to a month and a half after the
session. In addition, only one of the 8 interviewees had attended the radical candor
training. Considering that all interviewees asked for clarity around the definition of
radical candor, the interview process validated a factual knowledge gap regarding the
construct.
Focus group findings and document analysis. In the analysis of the large papers
left behind by the focus group discussion, it was noted across all groups that feedback
should have the following characteristics: Specificity, timeliness, formative, constructive,
not personal, related to actions, criticism in private, and praise as the recipient prefers.
Across all three papers, only one item was repeated four times: that self-compassion
involved owning mistakes and finding ways to fix them. The data gathered from the
focus group demonstrate that the factual knowledge around radical candor was present in
the large, collective group. A weakness of this group data analysis is that it did not show
what individual teacher leaders would know when working separately and leading their
own teams.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
76

Summary. There is some evidence that the assumed knowledge factor #1 was
demonstrated among teacher leaders by a minimum of a 90% margin. The survey results
indicated two areas in which participants collectively scored 90% correct or more:
• 91% of teacher leaders responded that feedback should not be about a person’s
personality traits.
• 93% of teacher leaders responded that feedback should be goal related, ongoing
and timely
The document analysis from the focus groups indicated a strong collective
understanding of peer feedback and self-compassion, as demonstrated by the description
of feedback as specific, timely, formative, constructive, and not personal. The most
common description of compassion was “owning mistakes and finding ways to fix them.”
While it would appear that this survey and focus group data pointed to a factual
understanding of the concepts presented, corresponding survey questions called this
assumption into question. For example, while 91% of teachers knew that feedback
should not be about personality traits, there were also 40% who felt that feedback should
not involve data nor peer evaluation of pedagogy. While one aspect of feedback was
factually known to teacher leaders, other key aspects to the concept were missing. For
the survey items that measured factual understanding of compassion and self-
compassion, participants scored an average of 79% and 58%, respectively; thus
demonstrating a factual knowledge gap in the area of compassion.
The focus group document analysis demonstrated that understanding existed
within the teacher leader cohort at the end of the radical candor session, yet the need of
all interviewees to ask for clarification as to the construct at the onset of the meeting
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
77

pointed to a lack of factual knowledge. While the knowledge may have existed within
the group collectively at the end of the training session, the interviews indicated that the
factual knowledge dissipated over time or was absent in those that did not attend the
session. In conclusion, a factual knowledge gap was validated regarding the ability to
identify the components of good feedback and self compassion.
Assumed knowledge influence #2: Teacher leaders can identify the organizational goal
for radical candor. The ability of teacher leaders to identify an organizational goal for
radical candor was measured through one survey item. Table 4.2 presents the results of
the multiple-choice item. An interesting finding for this item was that 69% of teacher
leaders were not aware of a goal around radical candor. As such, a factual knowledge
gap around the organizational goal was validated.

Table 4.2. Teacher leaders can identify the organizational goal for radical candor

Survey Prompt

Multiple Choice Options
Response
(%)

N
Which of the
following best
reflects the ISE
goal for radical
candor?
All teacher leaders will use radical candor 100% of the time. 7 29
I am not sure of the ISE goal around radical candor. 69
Teacher leaders will know about radical candor. 13
Most teacher leaders will know about radical candor. 10

Assumed knowledge influence #3: Teacher leaders can identify how the team may
respond to feedback. The ability of teacher leaders to identify how teams respond to
feedback was determined by survey and interview data.
Survey. The identification of team response was based in Gilbert’s (1999), Guide
to Social Mentalities. Two questions were presented in the survey to teacher leaders.
The first question asked teacher leaders to identify the personality traits of the team in
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
78

Gilbert’s (1999) model. The second question asked teacher leaders to identify the
expected types of response to feedback of the same teams. In Gilbert’s model, the
identification of the type of personality is directly related to the response to threat (or in
this case, feedback.) Thus, in order to demonstrate conceptual understanding of response
to feedback, there should also be a direct relationship between the identification of the
personality type of the team and the expected response to feedback. Table 4.3 provides a
comparison between personality type and response to threat as presented in the survey. It
should be noted that both survey items allowed teacher leaders to choose more than one
answer.

Table 4.3. Comparison between personality type and response to threat

Identify the personality type of the team
Response
(%)
Identify the team’s response to
threat of the team
Response
(%)
Competitive: looking to see who or what is
inferior or superior, more or less powerful
7 Feel put down, abused 31
Cooperative: looking to be of value to
others, sharing, contributing, helping,
appreciating
93 Feel unappreciated, rejected 35
Care-giving: provider of care, protection,
safety, reassurance
35 Feel overwhelmed, unable to
provide
28
Care-seeking: seeking input from others,
protection, safety, reassurance
21 Become unavailable,
withdrawn, threatening,
exploitative
28
(No option provided) N/A Other 48

The ability to predict the negative reaction to threat of specific team members is
important in helping to pre-empt negative consequences of feedback (Kim & Vich,
2016). If 93% of the team found their teams to be collaborative, and if teacher leaders
had understood Gilbert’s model (1999) conceptually, then a similar percentage of
respondents would have expected their teams to react to threat or direct challenge by
feeling unappreciated or rejected. Instead, an average of 31% chose one of the four
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
79

categories provided by Gilbert, resulting in a sum end of more than 100% of the
organization fearing some type of negative expectation related to feedback.
A weakness of the survey data was that an “other” option was provided to teacher
leaders in one question, but not the other. The logic behind this disparity was to provide
teacher leaders the opportunity to recognize teams that responded to feedback without
perceiving it to be a threat. The classification of “other”; however, left this item open for
interpretation. Considering that 48% of teacher leaders chose teams that respond to
feedback in the “other” category, it is difficult to interpret the survey data fully in
isolation from interview findings.
Interviews. The semi-structured interview process presented a variety of
opportunities for participants to discuss how team members might respond to feedback or
threat, including:
• What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
• What are the areas of growth for your team around the idea of radical candor?
• How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect your team goal?
Teacher leader interview comments pertaining to assumed knowledge item #3 were
placed in a table and organized by interviewee number. The comments were then
organized in descending order from the least reflective of identification of response to
feedback to the greatest. The results are provided in Table 4.4.
Interviewee #7 was the only participant to clearly identify how team members
responded to direct challenge:
We have a fairly high level of trust, it really in the end is about making
instruction better for kids, and we know it’s coming from a good
place. We make adjustments based upon the feedback. No personal
feelings hurt. We work mostly with men. We are more direct. We
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
80

Table 4.4. Teacher leaders can identify how the team may respond to feedback

ID#
Interview response related to: Teacher leaders can identify how the team may
respond to feedback.

Summary
1 We need to separate the personal from the professional… Making sure that we
don’t take things personally that are professional… We need for people to know,
“Your idea wasn’t necessarily used, but you as a person are respected…”
Team needs to
separate ideas
from people
2 …The key, though, is the idea of de-personalizing the issue. Hard on the issue,
soft on the person. Focus on the kids and the learning… What’s the issue at hand,
rather than the person?
Team needs to
separate ideas
from people
4 [We need to learn that] we should not take it personally when you hear a different
idea. To clarify the borderline between a personal attack, and “I just don’t like
your idea.” I don’t like your idea does not mean that I think you are dumb. We are
more cautious… about the wording.
Team needs to
separate ideas
from people
3 [We need] to build trust and professionalism. A code of ethics, treating each other
as professionals, listening, and having a dialogue, not answering and telling you
why you’re right or wrong.
Describes
manipulative
insincerity
5 People want to hear directly what is going on, yet they are the same people who
when I talk to them directly, they tend to reject the idea… One person tends to lead
the conversation- which is why I think one-on-one’s will be better.
Describes
manipulative
insincerity
6 I don’t think we are as straight up as we could be, but overall, we’re very caring,
and we’re moving toward that constructive conflict that we know will be useful as
a team.
Describes ruinous
empathy
8 I’d find [feedback] really hard. I have in my group, some people who [use a lot of
candor]. I see the results of that, and it upsets other people.
Describes
obnoxious
agression
7

We make adjustments based upon the feedback. No personal feelings hurt…We
respond immediately and then it gets done. There is no resentment. I tell
something to my teacher partner that he doesn’t like, he tells me to F off, and then
we hash it out and take care of it then and there. I think that was the purpose of
Strengthsfinders…
Describes a
radically candid,
care eliciting/
seeking team

respond immediately and then it gets done. There is no resentment. I tell
something to my teacher partner that he doesn’t like, he tells me to “F”
off, and then we hash it out, and take care of it then and there. I think that
was the purpose of Strengthsfinders…

The dialogue of Interviewee #7 indicated a teacher leader who engaged in radical
candor within his team and knew how team members would respond. He described a
care eliciting/seeking relationship, as the response to feedback appeared to be aggressive
and threatening, though team members seemed to know how the other would respond,
and how to work through the threat.
One interesting point to note from Interviewee #7, however, is this comment: “No
personal feelings hurt. We work mostly with men. We are more direct.” Considering
that several female colleagues had mentioned in interviews that they did not believe that
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
81

women had the same voice in the organization as men, this was an interesting comment.
As a result of the comment, the researcher asked him if radical candor was something
only for men, or if the same principle could be applied to teams with women.
Interviewee #7 responded as follows:
Depends on the women. It depends on the guy, as well. There’s the level
of trust. No one is trying to screw over anyone else. Nothing gets rolled
out of proportion. If people question me or come to me with the same
questions or concerns, I don’t know that I would respond the same
way. No one cares about glory. We just want to do our job. When people
are looking for credit or glory, that causes problems & mistrust.

Interviewee #7 hinted to the need to respond to differing people in different ways.
He said, “I don’t know that I would respond in the same way.” In this sense, he left open
to interpretation that he might have recognized that different people on the team may
react differently to threat.
Out of 8 interviewees, Interviewee #7 was the only one to state specifically how
teammates would respond to feedback. The other 7 interviewees identified possible
challenges with feedback but did not specifically identify the type of response that they
might expect from colleagues. Given the fact that the interview questions did not ask for
specific information regarding how team members respond to feedback, it is hard to
determine conclusively based upon the interview evidence whether or not the teachers
had the conceptual understanding needed to identify different reactions to feedback.
Summary. The incongruence in the response to the two survey items (team
identification and the expected response to feedback) suggested a likely lack of
conceptual understanding of Gilbert’s (1992) Guide to Social Mentalities. The interview
responses of 7 out of 8 interviews provided only vague mention of challenges within
teams in regard to feedback; only one interviewee provided information that
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
82

demonstrated a concrete understanding of how his team responded to feedback over time.
His ability to answer address how his team responded to feedback with specificity was
dependent upon his active engagement in radical candor. (He would not know how his
team responded to feedback if he had not been engaging in real feedback with his team.)
Considering that 40% of teacher leaders did not believe that feedback should include
conversations about pedagogy nor data comparison, it would be a natural conclusion that
many teacher leaders would not have known how team members responded to feedback
for the simple lack of experience of engaging in real feedback.
While both the survey and the interview measures are inconclusive in and of
themselves, both point to a likely lack of conceptual knowledge on the part of teacher
leaders in identifying specific response to feedback. When analyzed in conjunction with
the 40% of teachers that did not think that feedback included conversations regarding
pedagogy nor data, it is unlikely that teachers would have had the experience needed to
know how team members might have responded to feedback.
It would be interesting at a future date to provide further or more concrete probes
into this assumed influence. The evidence presented, however, presents the strong
probability of a conceptual knowledge gap in the ability of teacher leaders to identify
how team members responded to feedback.
Assumed knowledge influence #4: There is an understanding among teacher leaders of
their own self-compassion. Assumed knowledge influence #4 was evaluated through
three, sliding scale survey items. The semi-structured interviews were also combed
individually for reference of personal self-compassion.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
83

Survey. A sliding scale of zero to ten was used on three survey items to evaluate
the understanding of teacher leaders of their own self-compassion. All three items were
adapted from the instrument used to measure self-compassion created by Neff (2003).
Table 4.5 provides a summary of the survey items and responses.

Table 4.5. There is understanding among teacher leaders of their own self-compassion

Survey items measuring self-compassion
Average Response
(0-10)

N
I am kind to myself. 6.1 29
When I make a mistake, I tend to feel isolated. 6.0 29
I see my failings as something that happens to everyone. 6.7 28

The response to data of 6.1 to 6.7 on a sliding scale of 0-10 demonstrated that
teacher leaders had difficulty with the self-compassion. In order to further analyze
whether or not teachers truly understood their own levels of self-compassion, the survey
results were compared with interview data.
Interviews. The interviews were closely studied to find elements in the dialogue
of each interviewee related to the topic of self-compassion. Table 4.6 provides the
findings of the interviews.
Interviewee 3 was considered to be the least likely to engage in self-compassion
as she openly expressed negative repercussions to seeking help. Interviewee 1 made no
mention of the need to learn. On the contrary, she seemed to have a need to demonstrate
her skill and knowledge: “I have a lot of recognition from the parent community…”
While Interviewee 2 expressed that the team was always learning, she did not express the
personal need to learn anywhere in her interview.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
84

Table 4.6. Teacher leaders’ understanding of self-compassion

ID#
Interview response related to: There is understanding among teacher
leaders of their own self-compassion.

Summary
3 …I feel that here, that there is significant consequence. If you want to
discuss difficulties, then people will talk very freely about you as being a
difficult person.
Is afraid to get
help to learn.
1 I have a lot of recognition from the parent community and my work and
name is recognized in many schools across the world because of the
calibre of my students’ work.
Needs to show
skill; no mention
of needs
2 One way isn’t always the only way. To allow the time to let all the
voices… the more we have [radical candor], the broader perspectives,
then usually what comes out is a better outcome.
Mentions the need
of the team to
learn.
5 I don’t think I get a life. The schedule just assumes that you just take it
on. My predecessor did 12 hours every day, and weekends. The team is
used to working that way. How can I give people a break? How can I be
more humane?
Recognizes limits
6 I don’t like conflict. As a leader, I have taken note about that. As the
leader, and knowing that it is a challenge for me…
Can articulate
weakness
4 There is always something that I can grow. I wanted my Principal to tell
me straight up.
Mention the need
to learn
8 Nobody likes criticism, but we all need it, and it needs to be
constructive… If I have a very close colleague speak to me, then I listen
up.
7 … I take the blame and I make sure it’s public, yet I praise the group. I
will fall on the sword when things don’t go right. Solicit feedback and
use it and improve on it. Don’t shut it down. Use it. People see it- and it
builds trust. People have to know that you’re there with them. Once you
do that, and do that publicly, you gain trust.
Actively seeks
feedback and
makes sure others
know he is
learning.

Interviewees 5 and 6 expressed recognition of weakness or a personal limit, while
Interviewees 4 and 8 showed openness to the idea that personal learning was important.
Only Interviewee 7 showed clear conceptual understanding of self-compassion within the
radical candor framework.
Summary. The survey data presented an average of 6.3 on a 0–10 sliding scale.
The interview data revealed that 5 of 8 teachers (62%) were able to openly volunteer
some personal limitation, weakness, or need for learning. Even though the survey data
(6.3 of 10) was measuring personal level of comfort and the interview findings (62%)
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
85

represented the percentage of participants, it is interesting to note similarities on an
organizational level.
Despite discovering low levels of self-compassion, a conceptual knowledge gap
around the construct of self-compassion has not been validated. The low levels of self-
compassion could be due to other factors. For example, Interviewee 1 hinted to the
possibility of organizational barriers being behind the lack of self-compassion, “…I feel
that here, that there is significant consequence. If you want to discuss difficulties, then
people will talk very freely about you as being a difficult person.” Based upon the
evidence provided, the relationship between the low levels of self-compassion and a
conceptual knowledge gap was not conclusively demonstrated. In the future, it would be
interesting to further analyze this assumed knowledge influence by directly cross-
examining survey items and interview questions with specific participants.
Assumed knowledge influence #5: Teacher leaders can draw a connection between
feedback, compassion and identify team behaviors. The ability of teacher leaders to
draw a connection between feedback (direct challenge) and compassion (personal care)
was evaluated by survey and semi-structured interview.
Survey. Teacher leader understanding of the connection between feedback and
compassion was evaluated by means of 4, multiple choice survey items. Each item
identified one quadrant of the radical candor construct: ruinous empathy, manipulative
insincerity, obnoxious agression, and radical candor. Participants were asked to identify
the intersections of the quadrants by high or low levels of personal care and direct
challenge. Table 4.7 provides a summary of the findings.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
86

Table 4.7. Connection between feedback and compassion

Correct Survey Choice
Response
(%)

N
Radical candor is the intersection of high levels of care and direct challenge. 96 28
Ruinous empathy is high level of personal care/ low level of direct challenge. 68 28
Manipulative insincerity is low level of personal care/ low level of direct challenge. 75 28
Obnoxious aggression is low level of personal care/ high level of direct challenge. 82 28

Teacher leaders demonstrated >90% of understanding of radical candor as being
the intersection of high levels of personal care and high levels of direct challenge. The
survey data showed that intersections of care and challenge for the other three quadrants
of radical candor were understood by >90% of teacher leaders.
The following two survey items measured teacher leader understanding of the
culture of their own teams: a. “Which quadrant best describes your personal area of
comfort in conversation?”, and b. “Which quadrant best describes your team
interactions?” The results are presented in Table 4.8.
While the perceptions of the teacher leaders are expressed by the survey, the only
way to understand whether or not the teachers conceptually understand their responses
was to triangulate the data with interview statements. Based upon this survey data, one
would expect approximately 60% of teacher leaders to describe radically candid teams.

Table 4.8. Teachers understand the culture of their own teams

Personal Area of Comfort (N=27)
Response
(%)
Best Description of Team Interactions
(N=28)
Response
(%)
Radical candor 59 Radical candor 64
Obnoxious agression 11 Obnoxious agression 7
Manipulative Insincerity 4 Manipulative Insincerity 18
Ruinous Empathy 26 Ruinous Empathy 36

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
87

Interview. The conceptual understanding of teacher leaders in regard to the
relationship between feedback and compassion in teams as presented in interviews is
displayed in Table 4.9. Table 4.9 is followed by a discussion that explains the perceived
conceptual understanding of the teacher leader as well as the description of culture of the
team. Each team was organized into one of the four categories of the radical candor
construct so as to be able to compare and contrast interview and survey data.

Table 4.9. Relationship between feedback and compassion

ID#
Interview response related to: Teacher leaders can draw a connection
between feedback and compassion.
Conceptual
Understanding
1 My heart is tired. My soul is tired, and that’s no good for kids. I’m
going to keep my energy on my kids. My bandwidth is going to the
kids. Kids are easy. The adults stink.
Giving up on
feedback; need for
care
4 There is always something that I can grow. I wanted my principal to tell
me straight up.
Self-compassion
2 One way isn’t always the only way. To allow the time to let all the
voices… the more we have [radical candor], the broader perspectives,
then usually what comes out is a better outcome.
Emerging voice
and opinion in
team
6 We have been taking a lot of time to build a culture of care… And then I
think we have to create a space where we all recognize… That the top
priority is the students. If we keep that in mind, then it is not about a
person’s ideas, then that removes the personal argument and puts it in the
realm of a professional disagreement.
Strong with
compassion;
emerging voice
3 It takes a lot of little things to build a culture where it’s OK, before you
can ever get to notions of candor. You have to have trust.
Need trust as a
precursor
5 … in [one division] … I can have conversations without fear of
retribution. We have regular meetings. With [another division], I also
have regular meetings. There, I think .. the principals handle ideas
themselves. It is not welcome to talk about big ideas or topics. [In the
third division] …. I don’t see the leadership. I have had interactions with
two of them. Quite friendly. Nice things to say.
The intersection of
care and challenge
vary by division
8 • I find people who use radical candor for others, need to also be recipients
of it. Otherwise there is no trust. The base of this, before you even get to
this, is trust.
• The most skillful teachers are the ones who are the most brutally honest
but know how to show their care.
Intersection of
care and challenge
clearly stated
7 … I take the blame and I make sure it’s public, yet I praise the
group... Solicit feedback and use it and improve on it. Don’t shut it down.
Use it. People see it- and it builds trust. People have to know that you’re
there with them. Once you do that, and do that publicly, you gain trust.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
88

The intersection between the perceived conceptual understanding of the teacher
leader and the description of the team were compared. Each team was organized into one
of the four categories of the radical candor construct.
Interviewee 1 appeared to be shutting down on feedback to administration.
Throughout her interview, she described strained relationships with middle level
management: “…. I feel comfortable talking to [the Superintendent] about issues; I have
been encouraged to have voice and perspective. However, I keep being stopped by the
Principal.” Interviewee 1 expressed her own personal dissappointment with an apparent
lack of personal care within the organization, as well as the desire to cease providing
direct challenge or feedback. She did not make clear the relationship between care and
feedback clear in her interview, however, nor did she explain how the relationship
between the two constructs would affect her team. She described a team culture of
obnoxious agression, where feedback was part of the culture, but where relationships may
struggle: “Our discipline is pretty candid. It comes naturally with what we do…We have
candid conversations around the work we are doing. We need for people to know, ‘Your
idea wasn’t necessarily used, but you as a person are respected…’”
Interviewee #4 demonstrated a certain amount of self-compassion by seeking
direct feedback from her Administrator. She did not make clear mention, however, of the
relationship of personal care and direct challenge within the context of her team.
Interviewee #4 described a team that needed administrative intervention to function at the
most basic levels: “The Principal was involved, the [Director] was involved, leader of
PLC norms was reassured, reinforced, to make sure that nothing is under the table.”
Because of the need for direct intervention for the most basic levels of cooperation, and
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
89

since no direct evidence was supplied of high levels of care nor of direct challenge, this
team was placed in the quadrant of maniuplative insincerity.
Interviewee #2 discussed the emergence of voice and differing opinion as being
important in a team. She described a team in terms of civility and compromise, “Focus
on the learning and the kids, and the work we do together. The more we realize the
importance of our collaboration …. Why we are doing what we are doing. I don’t know
that everyone realizes the importance of the norms. We keep each other to task on
that…” While she addressed norms and collaboration, she avoided discussion of
personal care and direct challenge within her team. For this reason, her team was placed
in the center of the four quadrants but pertaining to none. In Thomas’ Conflict
Management Model, the center point of the two axes was compromise.
Interviewee 6 demonstrated clear procedural knowledge to building relationships
in team. At the same time, she recognized the need for direct challenge, but so hedged
her description of challenge, that it really appeared to be more representative of
difference of opinion rather than direct or meaningful feedback. She seemed to lack a true
conceptual understanding of direct feedback. Her team was categorized as having high
levels of care, and low levels of challenge, and as such was categorized in the quadrant of
ruinous empathy.
Interviewee 3 noted clearly that trust needed to exist before one might engage in
candid conversations. Throughout her interview, she described the lack of both trust and
direct challenge within her team. For example, she said: “People would not include me
in the conversation. When I would offer something at PLC…. I was completely
discredited.” While her experience within the school was negative, she directly linked
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
90

the two concepts consistently within her dialogue. Her team was categorized in the
quadrant of maniuplative insincerity due to the lack of personal care and low level of
direct challenge.
Interviewee 5 demonstrated working understanding of the intersection of
feedback and compassion with his description of different divisions. In some divisions,
he had regular meetings, thus leading to relationships, in which direct challenge was
permitted. He described radical candor in this instance. He also clearly described another
division of low personal care and low direct challenge, “…. I don’t see the leadership. I
have had interactions with two of them. Quite friendly. Nice things to say.” In so doing,
he was describing quite clearly the quadrant of obnoxious aggression. Within his own
team, however, Interviewee 5 described a manipulatively insincere team culture: “It’s
hard to get [in touch] with people... Here I’ve had to learn to be more political and hold
things back.”
Interviewee 8 clearly demonstrated the conceptual understanding of the
connection between compassion and feedback: “The most skillful teachers are the ones
who are the most brutally honest but know how to show their care.” When it came to his
own team interactions, however, he drew a clear line philosophically: “There is a time
and a place to use [radical candor], but it can’t be something that you use all the
time. It’s got to be used cautiously and carefully, and in small doses… I see a lot of
people dish out radical candor, but they can’t take it. That bothers me immensely.” He
further went on to describe team interactions with direct challenge, but without the
strength of relationship to sustain the challenge: “I have in my group, some people who
[use a lot of candor]. I see the results of that, and it upsets other people.” Due to the
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
91

demonstration of direct feedback without demonstrable personal care, the team of
Interviewee 8 was categorized in the quadrant of “obnoxious agression”.
Interviewee 7 described not only conceptual, but also procedural knowledge of
the intersection of personal care and direct challenge in his own team:
… I take the blame and I make sure it’s public, yet I praise the
group... Solicit feedback and use it and improve on it. Don’t shut it
down. Use it. People see it- and it builds trust. People have to know
that you’re there with them. Once you do that, and do that publicly,
you gain trust.

He repeatedly showed deep personal care for his team and colleagues by his
willingness to stick out his neck for other teachers:
Contracts are not being renewed. Admin is worried about the culture
of fear. If I walk in and say this isn’t fair, it’s not enough. Make it
an issue for admin, and they have to know that it will cause them
problems or make them look bad, and then things can move.

Interviewee 7 also demonstrated concrete examples of direct challenge within his
team as dependent upon trusting and tight relationships:
We have a fairly high level of trust, it really is in the end about
making instruction better for kids, and we know it’s coming from a
good place. We make adjustments based upon the feedback. No
personal feelings hurt… We respond immediately and then it gets
done. There is no resentment. I tell something to my teacher partner
that he doesn’t like, he tells me to F off, and then we hash it out and
take care of it then and there.

The team of Interviewee #7 was the only team placed in the quadrant of radical candor.
In conclusion, Interviewees 1, 4, and 2 did not present clear evidence in the
interview of a clear conceptual understanding of the intersection between direct challenge
and personal care. Interviewees 6, 3, and 5 presented partial evidence of the same
conceptual understanding. Interviewees 7 and 8 directly linked personal care and direct
challenge in their dialogue. The descriptions of the team cultures broke down as follows:
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
92

• Team of Interviewee 6: Ruinous Empathy
• Teams of Interviewees 3, 4 and 5: Manipulative Insincerity
• Teams of Interviewees 8 and 1: Obnoxious Aggression
• Team of Interviewee 2: Compromise (the mid point of both axes)
• Team of Interviewee 7: Radical Candor
Summary. Conceptual understanding of the intersection points of direct
challenge and personal care in forming radical candor was demonstrated by >90% of
survey participants. Fewer than 90% of survey participants were able to clearly identify
the intersections for the other three quadrants: manipulative insincerity, ruinous empathy,
and obnoxious aggression. 75% of interviewees offered some type of understanding of
the intersection of direct challenge and personal care.
In order to analyze the conceptual understanding around identification of team
culture, it was important to compare the survey and interview data for similarities or
differences. Given that the 8 interviewees were a random selection, one would expect the
self-identification of the survey items to be in alignment with the description of teams in
the interviews. For example, 59% of teacher leaders in the survey identified the quadrant
of radical candor as their personal area of comfort. 64% of teacher leaders identified
their teams as having a culture of radical candor. As such, given the random sampling of
the interviewees, one would expect that approximately 60% of teacher leaders in the
interview would provide descriptions of radically candid teams. Such an alignment
between the survey and the interview data would be a good indication of conceptual
identification of team culture in regard to radical candor. Figure 4.1 juxtaposes the
survey and interview data sets with the radical candor framework and Thomas’ (1992)
conflict model.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
93

Figure 4.1. Juxtoposition of survey and interview findings
in conflict and candor models

In the survey, approximately 60% of teacher leaders identified with a culture of
radical candor, yet only one out of 8 interviewees (12%) described a radically candid
team. Only 4% of teacher leaders self-identified with manipulative insincerity, and only
18% identified their teams as falling into the category, yet interview descriptions placed
38% of the teams in the category of low personal care and low direct challenge.
The discrepancy between the identification in the survey and the description in the
interviews suggests a conceptual knowledge gap in teacher leaders regarding the
intersection of direct challenge and personal care as it applies to their own teams. One
limitation to this analysis is that out of a pool of N=76, only 27 survey participants
answered one question and 28 answered the other one. In addition, 16 participants were
asked for interviews before 8 agreed. It is not known if these numbers in any way created
specific trends within the groups that might limit the ability to draw comparisons between
survey and interview data trends. The evidence provided, however, did suggest a
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
94

conceptual knowledge gap in the ability of teacher leaders to identify the relationship
between personal care and direct challenge within their teams.
Assumed knowledge influence #6: Teacher leaders know how to solicit feedback
personally and in meetings. Document analysis of focus group discussions and
interview data were analyzed to understand if teachers knew how to solicit feedback
personally. The same two data sources also analyzed procedural knowledge of leaders in
conducting meetings that were conducive to the receipt of feedback.
Focus group and document analysis. Three different prompts were provided to
teacher leaders in the focus group sessions. Each prompt began with “how to” so as to
best ensure understanding of procedural knowledge in leading teams.
• How to ensure all voices are heard in meetings.
• How to present the difference between helpful and harmful feedback.
• How leaders can model radical candor.
Table 4.10 summarizes the focus group responses to the four prompts. The teacher
leader cohort presented a variety of strategies for managing meetings and sharing the
difference between harmful and helpful feedback, as well as pieces of advice that would
prove helpful to one seeking feedback. The two tendencies that resounded 4 times across
three pieces of paper were “establish norms” and “ask for feedback”. While the recurring
item, “ask for feedback” may seem rudimentary, it is a very important first step in
receiving feedback that may be overlooked by many.
Interview. The interviews were scanned for evidence of procedural knowledge in
seeking feedback personally and in managing team meetings that enable feedback. Table
4.11 presents a summary of interview excerpts by teacher leaders in regard to seeking
feedback.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
95

Table 4.10. Procedural knowledge of the solicitation of feedback
How to ensure all voices are heard in
meetings.
How to present the
difference between harmful
and helpful feedback.
How leaders can model
radical candor.
• Establish norms (4)
• Agenda gives time to think prior to meeting
(2)
• Round Robin/ Table (2)
• Think-Pair-Share
• Silent writing responses
• Talking chips
• 1-minute share per person
• Listen first, speak second
• Seek to understand, then to be understood
• Use StrengthsFinders to ensure collaboration

• Share examples (2)
• Lead with a positive
• Share table comparing
contrasting harmful/
helpful
• Model
• PD on feedback
• Ask for feedback (X4)
• Build relationships/ trust
(X3)
• Show compassion (X2)
• Challenge directly (X2)
• Be vulnerable
• Accept feedback with
grace and humility
• Follow through with
feedback
• Be consistent

Table 4.11. Teacher leaders solicit feedback personally and in meetings
ID# Interview response related to: Teacher leaders know how to solicit
feedback
Personal
Feedback
Meeting
Feedback
8 [Someone provided me some crticism, and] it really bothered me…
There is a time and a place to use [radical candor], but it can’t be
something that you use all the time. It’s got to be used cautiously and
carefully, and in small doses…
No No
5 [I need] to start having the one-on-one conversations. The problem I
have is when to find the time. It’s hard to get (in touch) with people…
[In meetings] one person tends to lead the conversation- which is why I
think one-on-one’s will be better.
No No
2 It’s something we already do. The key, though, is the idea of de-
personalizing the issue. Hard on the issue, soft on the person. Focus on
the kids and the learning. As a leader, it’s important to deal with… This
is a norm.
No Feedback/
difference of
opinion
3 You don’t talk about people behind their back or go talk to admin to
figure things out. You have to be clear that we are two professionals
trying to figure something out…
Yes No
4 I will make sure that people have different access to me as a leader…
Some may feel free to talk in group, while others will need privacy. I
need to know people’s personalities well, their concerns...
Yes No
1 Our discipline is pretty candid. It comes naturally with what we
do. We’re always pushing limits and boundaries, because there are no
boundaries to what we do… We can have those conversations…. It’s the
very nature of what we do…
No Yes
6 I don’t like conflict. As a leader, I have taken note about tha t... I think
that we are developing a culture of accepting more differing opinions. I
don’t think we are as straight up as we could be… we’re moving toward
that constructive conflict that we know will be useful as a team.
Recognize
the need
Recognize
the need
7 Solicit feedback and use it and improve on it. Don’t shut it down. Use
it. People see it- and it builds trust. People have to know that you’re
there with them. Once you do that, and do that publicly, you gain trust.
The moment you place blame as the leader away from yourself, or
become defensive, then you lose that trust and it takes a really long time
to build that back up.

Yes Yes

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
96

Interviewees 8, 5 and 2 did not present information in the interviews that
suggested they had habits of personally soliciting feedback. Interviewees 8 and 5 did not
present data suggesting that they solicited feedback regularly from their respective teams,
though Interviewee 2 did present the ability to solicit difference of opinion within her
group through the establishment of team norms.
Interviewees 3 and 4 demonstrated procedural understanding of seeking personal
feedback, though they did not demonstrated understanding of how to establish team
cultures where feedback is expected. Interviewee 1 was the opposite, in that she never
mentioned the need to learn or to seek feedback personally, though she did clearly
describe a team that engaged in a culture of active feedback.
Interviewee 6 recognized a personal weakness as a leader by having difficulty in
engaging in direct challenge. She recognized this need to engage in direct challenge as a
team, as well. Interviewee 7 was the only participant to demonstrate full understanding
of how to seek feedback as a leader and how to create a team culture of feedback.
Summary. The focus group data suggested that communally, as a whole, the
procedural knowledge to solicit feedback existed within the leadership cohort. As
individuals, however, only Interviewee 7 demonstrated a clear understanding of how to
successfully solicit feedback personally and in teams. As such, a procedural knowledge
gap was validated for assumed knowledge influence #6.
Assumed knowledge influence #7: Teacher leaders know how to help colleagues
understand self-compassion. The ability of teacher leaders to engage in self-compassion
and compassion for others was analyzed through focus group data and document
analysis.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
97

Focus group and document analysis. In order to focus on procedural knowledge,
teacher leaders were asked to respond to the prompt, “How to create awareness of self-
compassion.” The focus group findings resulted in 3 responses related to modeling of
self-compassion by admitting mistakes and working to correct them. Two responses
addressed a need for life balance. One response suggested a self-evaluation based upon a
rubric of questions or definitions, and one response was to create a gratitude journal.
Interviews. Interviews were studied for responses related to the concept of
compassion or self-compassion. The results are presented in Table 4.12. Interviewees 3
and 6 made no mention to aspects of compassion or self-compassion. Interviewee 1
described a lack of compassion within the organization.

Table 4.12. Teachers can help colleagues understand self-compassion
ID# Interview response related to: Teacher leaders know how to help colleagues
understand ratings of self-compassion.
Summary of
responses
3 No mention Not applicable
6 No mention Not applicable
1 • … I spent the last two months going home crying every day. I feel like I’m
banging my head against a brick wall…
• [An area of growth for our team is] to separate the personal from the
professional…
• It goes back to the culture of fear…
• My heart is tired. My soul is tired, and that’s no good for kids.
Low
understanding of
personal self-
compassion;
unhealthy model
2 The radical candor at my level has been about goals and seeking possibilities for me
and asking for and receiving support for my own goals.
Self-compassion
4 There is always something that I can grow. Self-compassion
8 You can’t go in and think you’re going to save each child each and every day; you
will burn out and you won't be good for anyone.
Self-compassion
5 I don’t think I get a life. The schedule just assumes that you just take it on. My
predecessor did 12 hours every day, and weekends. The team is used to working
that way. How can I give people a break? How can I be more humane? The team
is used to working that way.
Struggles with
how to have
compassion for
self and allow it
for his team
7 • [I cannot talk to Admin about] Initiatives/ Initiative fatigue…
• [I now have many years] of teaching experience… I only now feel comfortable
about walking into a colleagues’ classroom and talking about what they’re
doing… I would never have felt comfortable doing that after only 3 years of
experience.
• Solicit feedback and use it and improve on it. Don’t shut it down. Use it. People
see it- and it builds trust. People have to know that you’re there with them. Once
you do that, and do that publicly, you gain trust. The moment you place blame as
the leader away from yourself, or become defensive, then you lose that trust and it
takes a really long time to build that back up.
Demonstrated
self-compassion
and leadership;
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
98

Interviewes 2 presented an aspect of self-compassion by taking time to pursue
personal goals within the organization. Interviewees 4 and 8 presented aspects of self-
compassion by being able to voice an area of growth or personal limitation.
Interviewee 5 was wrestling with how to have compassion for his team, and how
to allow his team to have self-compassion. He expressed frustration at not knowing how
to give his team understanding of self-compassion.
Interviewee 7 once again stood out from the group as having a personal
understanding of self-compassion and as actively seeking ways within the organization to
allow for compassion for teachers. He recognized his own personal self-compassion
through the recognition of his need to learn in order to share expertise with others.
Interviewee #7 also explicitly stated the need to model the solicitation of feedback as a
means of making a strong team.
In overview of the interview findings, 2 out of 8 interviewees made no reference
to aspects of compassion. One interviewee descried an extreme lack of compassion
within the organization. Three interviewees presented aspects of self-compassion within
their dialogu, and one interviewee described a desire to create some level of compassion
within the institution, though he did not know how. One interviewee described the
solicitation of feedback as a means of creating strong relationships in teams.
Summary. The document analysis of the focus group responses most commonly
indicated that the modelling of self-compassion would be effective in training teacher
teams in self-compassion. In the interviews, however, only 1 out of 8 teacher leaders
described the process of soliciting feedback in order to build strong teams. Whether the
lack of compassion within the organization was due to a lack of knowledge or whether it
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
99

was due to other reasons, however, was not completely clear in the data set. For
example, Interviewee 5 clearly described a search of procedural knowledge: “The team is
used to working that way. How can I give people a break? How can I be more
humane? The team is used to working that way.” Interviewee 7, in contrast, moved
quickly onto organizational barriers to self-compassion. One of the many examples of
this was in his comment:
I do not feel that I can talk about] initiatives/ initiative fatigue… I feel that
all admin is blind to this. With all the different plans, 2020 plans, with
immersion, NGSS, Quest, programs in the High School, standard based
grading, sports coverage, continued curricular writing, continued PLC
work, and all of the myriad of things… demands are placed not only on
faculty members, but on other supporting teachers and existing structures
and programs… How will this affect future jobs and families?

In summary, the interview data suggests that compassion and self-compassion
may be areas for growth within the institution. While the source of the tension is not
identified clearly as a lack of procedural knowledge or as an organizational barrier, there
was some evidence that strongly suggested that this may in part be due to a lack of
procedural knowledge. The main indicator of this lack of procedural knowledge was in a
teacher leader looking for “how to” create a more humane working environment, while
others expressed frustration. As such, for the purpose of this study, it will be assumed
that a procedural knowledge gap for knowledge influence #7 has been validated.
Assumed knowledge influence #8: Teacher leaders know how to implement a culture of
radical candor. Radical candor is the intersection of assumend knowledge influences 6
and 7. In order to know how to implement a culture of radical candor, it was necessary to
know how to implement a culture of personal care and to create a culture of direct
challenge. This intersection of assumed knowledge was assessed through focus group
data and interview data.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
100

Focus group and document analysis. Teacher leaders were asked to respond to
the following two prompts:
• How to share the concept of radical candor and why it matters.
• How leaders can model radical candor.
The complete list of responses to the two prompts is located in Table 4.13. As a
cohort, teacher leaders presented a list that would demonstrate procedural knowledge to
the building of radically candid teams. It is important to note the repeated understanding
among teacher leaders of the importance to solicit feedback in order to create team
cultures of radical candor.

Table 4.13. Teacher leaders know how to implement a culture of candor
Responses to the prompt: How to share the
concept of radical candor and why it matters.
Responses to the prompt: How leaders can
model radical candor.
• Model candor and seek feedback (X3)
• Begin with “why”
• Provide a research base
• Share the four quadrants with the PLC and
reflect
• Show the video of radical candor
• Dissect the radical candor matrix
• Share examples of group think
• Connect radical to core values and Desired
Student Learning Outcomes (DSLOs)

• Ask for feedback (X4)
• Build relationships/ trust (X3)
• Show compassion (X2)
• Challenge directly (X2)
• Be vulnerable
• accept feedback with grace and humility
• Follow through with feedback
• Be consistent

Interviews. Since radical candor is the intersection of the two axes of compassion
and feedback, the determination of procedural knowledge for radical candor was also
dependent upon these two axes. Assumed Knowledge Sections 6 and 7 presented clearly
that Interviewee 7 was the only teacher leader to demonstrate the procedural knowledge
of how to lead a team with direct challenge (feedback) and personal care (compassion).
Summary. The document analysis produced a nice list of procedural knowledge
ideas from the entirety of the cohort. The specific description of procedural knowledge
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
101

as presented in interviews, however, validated the likelihood of a procedural knowledge
gap on the part of teacher leaders around the establishment of radically candid team
cultures.
Assumed knowledge influence #9: Teacher leaders know how to reflect on areas of
strength and growth for feedback and compassion. The metacognition of teacher
leaders was measured through the semi-structured interviews. Although a variety of
questions provided teacher leaders possible opportunities to reflect on areas of strength or
for growth within their respective teams, two specific questions requested information
regarding this assumed knowledge influence:
• What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
• What are the areas of of weakness in your team around the idea of radical candor?
The interviews were analyzed and comments relating to metacognition of
strengths and weaknesses were placed into respective columns. Table 4.14 presents a
summary of the results.
Interviewees 8, 5, 4, and 3 presented no description of areas of strength in their
teams around the concept of radical candor. They did, however describe certain areas for
growth within their respective teams. Interviewee 2 was the only one to indicate areas of
strength, but she did not describe any areas of growth within her team.
Interviewees 1, 6 and 7 described areas for both strength and growth within their
teams. The reflection of Interviewee 1 described a team with a culture of direct
challenge, but with personal care as being an area for growth. Interviewee 6 described
the opposite. She described a team with high levels of personal care and the need to
develop the capacity for direct challenge. Interviewee 7 described a team of radical
candor, yet still provided areas for improvement.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
102

Table 4.14. Metacognition of strengths and weaknesses
ID# Metacognition around areas of strength for
radical candor
Metacognition around areas of growth for
radical candor
8 Not expressed I find people who use radical candor for others,
need to also be recipients of it. Otherwise there
is no trust. I see a lot of people dish out radical
candor, but they can’t take it. That bothers me
immensely.
5 Not expressed People want to hear directly what is going on,
yet they are the same people who when I talk to
them directly, they tend to reject the idea… One
person tends to lead the conversation- which is
why I think one-on-one’s will be better.
4 Not expressed … we should not take it personally when you
hear a different idea
3 There’s not [an area of strength in this regard]. [We need] to build trust and professionalism. A
code of ethics, treating each other as
professionals, listening, and having a dialogue,
not answering and telling you why you’re right
or wrong.
2 The more we realize the importance of our
collaboration …. We keep each other to task on
[norms]…
Not expressed.
1 Our discipline is pretty candid. We need for people to know, “Your idea wasn’t
necessarily used, but you as a person are
respected…”
6 We want to create a team bond. We are
constantly checking in with each other to see
that people are doing well… we’re very caring,
and we’re moving toward that constructive
conflict that we know will be useful as a team.
I don’t like conflict. As a leader, I have taken
note about that. We didn’t think that we had a
lot of need for constructive conflict, as we are
pretty much aligned, but I think that we are
developing a culture of accepting more differing
opinions.
7 We have a fairly high level of trust, it really in
the end is about making instruction better for
kids, and we know it’s coming from a good
place. We make adjustments based upon the
feedback. No personal feelings hurt.

[We need to know] how to have candor and
phrase things nicely. Particularly in certain
subject matters where we are not so good with
words.

In summary, 3 of 8 interviewees were able to express areas of strength and growth
for their respective teams in regard to radical candor. Since only 38% (3 out of 8
interviewees) described both strengths and weakness of their teams in regard to radical
candor, the interview data suggests the presence of a metacognitive knowledge gap.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
103

Assumed knowledge influence #10: Teacher leaders can communicate the implications
of candor in relation to the goal. Assumed knowledge influence #10 was analyzed
through interview data. Two specific questions were asked in order to solicit response
from teacher leaders:
• How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect your team goal?
• How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect the school goals?
Interview responses pertaining to assumed knowledge influence #10 are presented
in Table 4.15. Two of 8 interviewees did not respond to either of the two questions that
solicited information regarding metacognition of goals and a culture of radical candor.
Interviewee 1 recognized the absence of radical candor (or a culture of fear) as negatively
affecting the organizational goal. Interviewee 3 stated clearly that her team had no radical
candor and no measurable goal.
Interviewees 6, 2 and 4 demonstrated limited metacognition of an intersection
between radical candor and school goals. In contrast, Interviewee 7 demonstrated clear
and specific metacognitive understanding of the relationship between radical candor and
institutional goals by stating the negative consequences of not engaging in caring and
candid team relationships.
In summary, of the six interviewees that responded to the questions regarding the
intersection of goals and radical candor, only one teacher was able to clearly demonstrate
metacognition on the topic. As such, the interview data suggests a metacognitive
knowledge gap for assumed knowledge influence #10.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
104

Table 4.15. Relationship between the goal and radical candor
ID# Interview response related to: Teacher leaders can communicate the implications
of candor in relation to the goal
Summary of
responses
8 No answer N/A
5 No answer N/A
1 It goes back to the culture of fear. How can I support the big goal, if I don’t feel
like my voice was a part of it?
Recognition of
fear and
negative effect
on goal
3 Neither my team nor my division has a culture of candor. I don’t have a
measurable goal. At the end of the year, we can say that this is what we did, but I
don’t think we can say how students grew in relation to the goal.
No candor; No
measurable
goal.
6 Long pause…Well. Long pause. I think one thing we’ve brought up items and
requests, but have been denied… We brought that up and stated our reasons, and
they said no. Which maybe if there was more radical candor and they really
cared… I don’t know what the purpose of the SMART goal is for [X Director],
but I think it’s about teacher learning in order to impact student learning. That
was not something [X Director] was open to. I think you can make
suggestions. I think some people can be open and straight up. I think typically
the admin will not always agree, but not even give a strong reason back. We
haven’t always engaged in that dialogue. We ask, they say no, or we ask they say
yes, but there is not that dialogue that makes things stronger.
A fuzzy
relationship
between
candor and
goals.
2 One way isn’t always the only way. To allow the time to let all the voices… the
more we have [radical candor], the broader perspectives, then usually what comes
out is a better outcome.
Recognition of
better
outcomes with
voice
4 I don’t think it’s affecting a lot. I think our dept has done a lot to ensure we can
reach the goal. Budget. There have been challenges. We’ve been
supported. Our needs were clear and we have a plan.
Budget
problems
addressed
7 What ends up happening [if you don’t have candor] is you don’t get good
feedback. People are afraid to speak up. They don’t feel comfortable with tough
conversations. Leadership tend to get a rosier picture about the movement toward
the goal or the reason to do it than actually exists. If you can’t have honest
feedback, then you can’t have honest conversations, then you can’t have good
data to make good decisions. Then it builds resentment, lack of follow through,
lack of commitment to organizational goals.
A strong
relationship
between
candor goals

Summary of assumed knowledge factors
Table 4.16 presents a summary of the assumed knowledge factors and
corresponding validated gaps. As shown in Table 4.16, there was a validation of gap for
the majority of the assumed knowledge factors
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
105

Table 4.16. Summary of assumed knowledge factors and gap validations

Assumed Knowledge Factor

Validation of Gap
1 Teacher leaders can identify types of feedback and compassion. Yes
2 Teacher leaders can identify the organizational goal for radical
candor.
Yes
3 Teacher leaders can identify how the team may respond to
feedback.
Yes
4 There is an understanding among teacher leaders of their own self-
compassion.
Not conclusive
5 Teacher leaders can draw a connection between feedback,
compassion and identify team behaviors.
Yes
6 Teacher leaders know how to solicit feedback personally and in
meetings
Yes
7 Teacher leaders know how to help colleagues understand self-
compassion.
Yes
8 Teacher leaders know how to implement a culture of radical
candor.
Yes
9 Teacher leaders know how to reflect on areas of strength and
growth for feedback and compassion.
Yes
10 Teacher leaders can communicate the implications of candor in
relation to the goal.

Yes

Motivational Influences
The findings for the organizational needs for motivation among key stakeholders
are organized by assumed influence, with the data for each collection tool presented,
followed by a summary regarding the validation of that influence.
Assumed motivationaliInfluence #1: Confidence in the ability to engage in feedback
across different levels of the organization. Teacher leader confidence in engaging in
feedback was assessed through survey items and then further analyzed with interview
data.
Survey items. There were four survey items addressing the confidence of
stakeholders in engaging with feedback. Each item was a sliding scale of 0-10. Table
4.17 presents a summary of the survey findings.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
106

Table 4.17. Confidence in engaging in feedback

Confidence in engaging in feedback.
Rank
(0-10)

N
I feel confident in my ability to provide radically candid feedback to my
team.
5.7 29
I feel confident that my team is able to give me radically candid feedback. 5.5 29
I feel confident in my ability to provide feedback to IAs or others who work
“under” me.
5.6

29
I feel confident in my ability to provide feedback to other teachers in the
leadership cohort.
5.7 29
I feel confident in my ability to provide feedback to Admin or others who
work above me.

8.6 29

Teacher leaders portrayed confidence as an average 5.6 on a scale of 0 to 10 in
engaging in feedback with team members, Instructional Assistants, and colleagues. The
one point of contrast in the data was that teacher leaders indicated a higher level of
confidence (8.6 on a scale of 0 to 10) in engaging in feedback with Administration. This
was an interesting finding, and as such, it is further analyzed in the interview data.
Interview data. Four out of eight interviewees expressed confidence in broaching
a difficult topic with the Superintendent or Assistant Superintendent, while at the same
time contrasted the statement with a lack of confidence in broaching a difficult topic with
other members of the district office or divisional leadership teams. Interviewee #3
presented this dilemma well:
If I have to go the Assistant Superintendent, if I said, “Oh, what was that
about?” I get a nice dialogue/ get clarity. In my own divisional admin,
I’ve had a few interactions with radical candor, and I have felt very
stressed and shy. I don’t feel that I present myself or my ideas well,
because I… I seem to have a different opinion than most of my
colleagues… [My ideas were] too different, and then people didn’t want
me to be part of the team. So then I didn’t feel safe or comfortable talking
with colleagues or administration.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
107

Interviewee #7 expressed a similar point of view:
I feel more comfortable with the [Superintendent and Assistant
Superintendent] than I do with my own administration. I feel like there is
trust. I feel like if I go in there and tell [them] something, I feel like there
is trust.

Of the remaining four interviewees, two stated that they did not interact with the
higher end leadership and that they felt that they could broach difficult topics with
divisional leadership. For example, Interviewee 4 stated the following:
To be honest, I don’t really know a lot about the high level at the school
because I don’t interact with them. I feel that the principals … are quite
straightforward. They help clarify the process… that it will be taken care
of.

Interviewee 6 described manipulative insincerity and a lack of follow through on
the part of divisional leadership and District Office leadership that interacted with her
team. She did not describe any level of leadership with which she could engage in direct
feedback, though she did describe the attempt to do so. For example:
When [X Admin] are present, they are mostly there on a caring role. Not
particularly giving any specific feedback. Just general feedback such as
“Really good”. If it’s not someone we work with consistently however,
then that trust isn’t there, then it comes off as obnoxious aggression. I
don’t know if that’s a product of the size of the school. I don’t feel that
District Office or the principal is very visible. We don’t have a lot of
contact time with them. I think that our Deputy can be straight up, in a
good way, but occasionally is a bit disconnected from the work we are
doing.

Interviewee 8 expressed a personal philosophy that opposed broaching difficult
topics, “I don’t say what I think, I sit back and observe. I have a saying, ‘Know your
lane, your roles and responsibilities.’ It’s not my place to say that.” Table 4.18
summarizes the interview findings in relation to teacher leader confidence in engaging in
feedback with different levels of the organization.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
108

Table 4.18. Confidence in engaging in feedback with the superintendent
ID # Confidence in engaging in
feedback with the Superintendent
Confidence in engaging in feedback with
Divisional or District Office Leadership
1 Yes No
3 Yes No
7 Yes No
5 Yes No
4 No relationship Yes
2 No relationship Yes
6 No relationship Attempted; described manipulative insincerity
8 Opposed to feedback Opposed to feedback

Summary. Survey recipients expressed slightly more than a 50% level of
confidence in broaching difficult topics with colleages, but slightly more than an 80%
level of confidence of broaching difficult topics with some level of administration. The
confidence in speaking with some level of administration was corraborated by the semi-
structured interviews, where 6 out of 8 interviewees (75%) felt confidence in broaching
difficult topics with some level of administration. An interesting finding in the
interviews was that 4 out of 8 participants stated in an unsolicited manner that they felt
more confidence in speaking with the Superintendent or Assistant Superintendent than
with their own divisional leadership. In conclusion, the survey and interview data a
validate motivational gap in the confidence to engage in feedback.
Assumed Motivational Influence #2: Confidence in the ability to engage in compassion
across different levels of the organization. In regard to the confidence to engage in
compassion, the items were adapted from Neff’s (2003) instrument. There were three
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
109

survey items on a sliding scale of zero to ten. Table 4.19 presents the items and results
for confidence in compassion.
The ability to admit mistakes is an important aspect of self-compassion, and as
such, is foundational to compassion for others (Neff, 2003). In order to measure teacher
leader self-efficacy around compassion, it would have been prudent to have asked what
level of confidence teacher leaders had in admitting mistakes when interacting with
different levels of the organization. Such a design would have mirrored the questions
around self-efficacy in feedback, and in so doing, would have presented data for
comparison and triangulation. As the survey stands, unfortunately, the data for
confidence in self-compassion is inconclusive.

Table 4.19. Confidence in compassion

Self-compassion.
Rank
(0-10)

N
I am kind to myself. 6.1 29
I see my failings as something that happens to everyone. 6.7 28
When I make a mistake, I tend to feel isolated. 6.0 29

Assumed motivational influence #3: Confidence in the ability of the team to engage in
feedback. The confidence of the ability of the team to engage in feedback was measured
using three sliding scale survey items. The items and results are presented in Table 4.20.
Teacher leaders suggested difficulty in engaging in feedback within their
respective teams; nevertheless, at the same time, expressed confidence that their teams
had cultures of radical candor. Considering that radically candid teams would need
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
110

Table 4.20. Confidence in the team to engage in feedback

Confidence in the team’s ability to engage in feedback
Rank
(0-10)
N
I feel confident that my team is able to give me radically candid feedback. 5.5 29
I feel confident in my ability to provide radically candid feedback to members
of my team.
5.7 29
I feel confident that my team has a culture of radical candor. 10 29

people confident in the capacity to provide feedback with colleagues and team members,
it was assumed that there was a lack of understanding in “a culture of radical candor”. As
such, the result for the team culture, while noted, in and of itself was not sufficient to
indicate that the team had confidence in engaging in feedback. Considering that team
leaders doubted the ability of teams to challenge them directly, and vice versa, a gap for
assumed motivational influence #3 was validated.
In the future, it would be beneficial to add items that more specifically address the
confidence of the team as a whole in engaging in feedback, without the interaction with
the team leader. For example, it would be interesting to know if team members felt
confident in directly challenging each other, even though they might not have felt that
level of confidence with their team leader. It would also be interesting to know if this
was done individually, or in the context of group meetings.
Assumed motivational influence #4: Belief that the responsibility for feedback lies
within oneself. Motivational influence #3 was measured through two survey items.
Each item was ranked on a sliding scale of 0 to 10. Table 4.21 presents the items and the
findings.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
111

Table 4.21. Beliefs that responsibility for feedback is within

Survey Items
Rank
(0-10)

N
I believe that the responsibility for providing feedback to members of my team
ultimately lies with me.
5.7 29
I believe it is my responsibility to provide feedback to Admin. 6.2 29

The sense of personal responsibility for providing feedback to team members was
a 5.7 out of 10 on a sliding scale. The sense of responsibility among teacher leaders to
provide feedback to administration was 6.2 out of 10. The survey data validated a gap in
the level of personal responsibility among teacher leaders for providing feedback.
Assumed motivational influence #4: Ability to extend compassion to others. The
confidence of stakeholders in extending compassion to others was measured through
survey and interview data.
Survey data. Motivational influence #4 was measured through one survey item
with a sliding scale of zero to 10. Table 4.22 presents the item and the findings for
confidence in the ability to extend compassion.

Table 4.22. Confidence in the ability to extend compassion

Survey Item
Rank
(0-10)

N
When faced with the weaknesses of a team member, I know how to
leverage his strengths to the benefit of the team.
5.3 29

The survey item suggests the validation of a gap in the confidence of teachers in
extending compassion to team members. One survey item presents a limited measure of
confidence among stakeholders, however, so for this reason it is necessary to analyze this
information in conjunction with interview data.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
112

Interview data. The interviews were scanned for mention of team interactions
relating to compassion. The results are provided in Table 4.23 for interview responses to:
Teacher leaders are confident in extending compassion to teams.
Interviewee 2 made no mention of compassion in relation to the team, only in
relation to her own personal needs. Interviewees 1, 5 and 3 expressed frustration at a lack
of compassion in the organization and teams. Interviewees 6 and 8 described an
interesting trend: problems with team mates were being pushed on to Principals. This
could reflect a lack of direct feedback and compassion within teams. Teacher leaders

Table 4.23. Teacher leaders are confident in extending compassion to teams
ID# Interview response related to: Teacher leaders are confident in extending
compassion to others
Summary of
response
2 No mention of how to extend compassion to the team No mention
1 My heart is tired. My soul is tired, and that’s no good for kids. I’m going to
keep my energy on my kids. My bandwidth is going to the kids. Kids are
easy. The adults stink.
Expresses lack
of confidence
5 I don’t think I get a life. The schedule just assumes that you just take it on. My
predecessor did 12 hours every day, and weekends. The team is used to
working that way. How can I give people a break? How can I be more
humane? The team is used to working that way.
You look like you are being negative about things, because you’re trying to
change them. I was doing what I thought was an improvement and stakeholders
saw it as negativity.
Expresses of
lack of
confidence
3 It makes me sound like a really unhappy, bitter person. I’m not sure I have a
place here…
Expresses lack
of confidence
6 Sometimes there are issues, and being a PLC leader, issues with the
Instructional Assistants (IAs) or with certain teachers, we end up being the go-
between people on our team and the principals. I don’t feel that these issues are
always dealt with. They say they will be dealt with it, but the follow-through
isn’t there. There seems to be a disconnect between the priorities and needs of
the team and the actions of the admin.
Team issues get
pushed on to
principals
8 I have had a difficult conversation, with my deputy principal. It was about the
professional practices of another person at the school. It was a difficult
conversation to have. I don’t want to have anyone at the school have their job
jeopardized. I felt the student was not being serviced to their best needs.
Team issues get
pushed on to
principals
4 I think we are on the right path. We all share the same needs and
challenges. We all want to do this. We seek help as a whole team.

Commonality of
problems
7 Strengths Finders are not permanent characteristics but change with mood…
Leadership is service. I had good leaders in front of me. An old school principal
teacher. He wholeheartedly took blame if something happened.

Ability to take
blame for team

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
113

indicated personal responsibility to provide feedback to team members as 5.7 on a sliding
scale, while feedback to administration was 6.2 on a sliding scale. This point causes one
to wonder if the responsibility to provide feedback to administration was about what
administration was doing or what fellow colleagues were doing.
Interviewee 4 presented a commonality of problems between herself and her
team, which would be foundational in compassion. Interviewee 7 directly mentioned
StrengthsFinders as well as the philosophical need of a leader to take blame for the team.
Summary. Teacher leaders indicated a level of confidence of 5.3 on a 0 to 10
scale in regard to their ability to extend compassion to team members. Analysis of the
interview data resulted in 3 out of 8 teachers expressing frustration, and thus a lack of
confidence around compassion in teams. Two of 8 teachers appeared to address
problems with team members through higher levels of administration, thus suggesting
little confidence in the ability to engage in compassion directly. Another two out of 8
teachers presented some information regarding compassion being extended to team
members. Considering the survey and interview data, a motivational gap of confidence
in the ability to extend compassion within teams has been validated.
Assumed motivational influence #5: Onus for candor within teams. Motivational
influence #5 measured whether or not the people within teams felt responsibility to
provide feedback to each other. Table 4.24 presents the survey item and results.

Table 4.24. Responsibility to provide feedback within teams

Survey Item

Rank (0-10)

N

My team feels responsible to provide feedback to each other.

9.4

29

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
114

Based upon this survey item, it would appear that teams felt the responsibility to
provide feedback to each other. This finding of responsibility for feedback within teams
is an interesting divergance from previous findings within the organizational culture. For
example, in the study of Assumed Knowledge Influence #1, it was discovered that 40%
of teacher leaders did not believe that feedback should involve peer evaluation of
teaching nor data comparisons. In the study of Assumed Motivational Influence #3,
teacher leaders only indicated the personal sense of responsibility in providing feedback
as 5.7 on a scale of 0 to 10. Therefore, it is interesting to note there is a perception of
responsibility on the part of the team to provide feedback. Given the sliding scale
indicator was >8, no gap in this section was validated.
Assumed motivational influence #6: Feedback, compassion and radical candor are
valued; belief that feedback, compassion and radical candor will help achieve already
established goals. Values and percieved alignment with goals were analyzed through
surveys and interview data.
Surveys. The values and perceived alignment with the goal were measured
through sliding scale survey items. Table 4.25 presents the findings. The survey results
indicated that teacher leaders value radical candor and its components in their teams. The
results also indicated that a culture of radical candor was percieved to be in alignment
with achieving organizational goals. As such, no gap was validated in this category.
Teacher leaders were shown to value radical candor and find it to be in alignemnt with
goals.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
115

Table 4.25. Radical candor and alignment with goals

Survey Item

Rank (0-10)

N
I value a team culture of candid feedback. 8.5 29
I value a team culture based in compassion. 8.6 29
I value a team culture of radical candor. 8.3 29
I think a culture of radical candor will help the school achieve its 2020
goals.

8.2 29

Interviews. The interview data implicitly or explicitly seemed to indicate value in
the construct of candor across team leaders, with only one out of 8 interviewees openly
opposed to the concept of candor. Interviewee #8 expressed his opposition to the
concept with the following statement, “Radical candor is coming from the corporate
world. I know the corporate world can be very brutal.”
The rest of the interviewees demonstrated a percieved value of radical candor by
bemoaning the lack thereof, or by openly striving for it. For example, Interviewee #6
expressed her value of radical candor with the following statement:
We didn’t think that we had a lot of need for constructive conflict, as we
are pretty much aligned, but I think that we are developing a culture of
accepting more differing opinions. I don’t think we are as straight up as
we could be, but overall, we’re very caring, and we’re moving toward that
constructive conflict that we know will be useful as a team.

Interviewee #7 provided a clear and succint explanation of the value of radical
candor in an organization:
What ends up happening [if you don’t have a culture of radical candor] is
you don’t get good feedback. People are afraid to speak up. They don’t
feel comfortable with tough conversations. Leadership tend to get a rosier
picture about the movement toward the goal or the reason to do it than
actually exists. If you can’t have honest feedback, then you can’t have
honest conversations, then you can’t have good data to make good
decisions. Then it builds resentment, lack of follow through, lack of
commitment to organizational goals.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
116

Summary. Sliding scale survey data presented >80% value in the radical care
and the components thereof. Interview data also demonstrated value for radical candor,
with 7 of 8 interviewees expressing value for the construct. In light of the survey and
interview data, no motivational gap for value was validated.

Summary of motivational influences
Table 4.26 presents the summary of assumed motivational factors pertaining to a
culture of radical candor at ISE and the results.

Table 4.26. Summary of ssumed motivational factors

Assumed Motivational Factor
Validation
of Gap
1 Confidence in the ability to engage in feedback across different
levels of the organization
Yes
2 Confidence in the ability to engage in compassion across different
levels of the organization.
Inconclusive
3 Confidence in the ability of the team to engage in feedback Yes
4 Belief that the responsibility for feedback lies within oneself Yes
5 Confidence in the ability to extend compassion to others Yes
6 Onus for candor within teams No
7 Feedback, compassion and radical candor are valued; belief that
feedback, compassion and radical candor will help achieve
already established goals.
No

Organizational Influences
The findings for the organizational influences among key stakeholders are
organized by assumed influence, with the data for each collection tool presented,
followed by a summary regarding the validation of that influence.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
117

Assumed organizational influence #1: Leadership communicates the need for radical
candor. The communication of the goal around radical candor was evaluated through
means of survey. Table 4.27 presents the survey item and results.

Table 4.27. Leadership communicates the need for radical candor

Survey Prompt

Multiple Choice Options

Rank (%)

N
I know that ISE has a
cultural goal of radical
candor because (check
all that apply)
I heard about it from admin in an informal setting 7 29
14% 14
I see it in written communications from admin 0
I am not sure that there is a formal goal of radical candor 90

The survey results validate a gap in organizational influence regarding the goal.
It would have been interesting to present this question in a variety of formats. For
example, a survey item such as “I know that ISE has a goal for all teachers to work in
effective, collaborative teams,” would have most likely have presented very different
results. The leadership very consistently sent the message in formal and informal settings
of the need for teamwork in the organization. The definition of effective or collaborative,
however, may have been left open to the interpretation of the teacher leader. Extensive
training was conducted on helping teams to get along, and thus certain aspects of the
personal care axis of radical candor were communicated. Separate training was
conducted on the work of Professional Learning Communities in analyzing measurable
goals, which suggest the need for direct challenge, though not directly. The survey
results here validated a gap in the messaging regarding the intersection of the two
(personal care and direct challenge) in the form of radical candor.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
118

Assumed organizational influence #2: Leadership models radical candor by listening
without defensiveness, reporting back when changes are made as a result of candor,
building relationships, and admitting mistakes. The way in which leadership modeled
the organizational goal of radical candor was evaluated through survey and interview
items. Table 17b demonstrated a disparity in the level of trust in the organization in
sharing feedback with direct supervisors as opposed to the Superintendent or Assistant
Superintendent. Given the structure of the school and the reality that two people could
not possibly hear all stakeholders to the extent needed in an organization, the leadership
team analyzed in this section is that of middle management.
Survey. The results for five items ranked from 0-10 are presented in Table 4.28.
The survey results demonstrated that teacher leaders in large part expected a defensive
response to feedback from their direct supervisor (6.8 on a scale of 0 to 10). If teacher
leaders were to speak with a direct supervisor, they only had approximately a 50% sense
of assurance that a positive change would ensue. Teacher leaders also indicated
approximately a 50% degree of confidence in that their adminstrators knew them well
enough to leverage their strengths to the benefit of the school. Teacher leaders did give
supervisors a slightly higher mark on the ability to be open about mistakes (6.6 on a scale

Table 4.28. Administration models candor

Survey Item

Rank (0-10)

N
If I were to speak with my direct supervisor about a problem, I would
expect the response to be defensive.
6.8 29
If I were to speak with my direct supervisor about a problem, I am quite
sure that things would change for the better.
5.4 29
I feel that my direct supervisor knows how to best leverage my strengths
to the benefit of the school.
5.6 29
My direct supervisor is open about his mistakes. 6.6 29
My direct supervisor models radical candor.

5.2 29

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
119

of 0 to 10). The survey results indicated an organizational influence gap in the modeling
of radical candor by direct supervisors.
Interviews. Three interview prompts examined how the leadership team modeled
radical candor. The prompts were as follows:
• Describe your understanding of the culture of the leadership team at the school in
regard to radical candor
• Describe a radically candid interaction that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
• Are there other issues that you perceive to be important that you would not
discuss with Administration? What are they? Why would you not bring them up?
As a result of the quantity of data, two tables were needed to present the
information. Table 19c displays interview quotes related to how leadership modelled
radical candor. The quotes are organized from the least indicative of leadership modeling
radical candor to the most indicative. Table 4.29 provides quotes which indicate the
sensitive topics within the school about which teacher leaders expressed discomfort.
Interviewees 7, 3 and 1 indicated that feedback was not welcome by their
immediate supervisors. An interesting point to note is that both Interviewees 7 and 1
were the only two team members of the 8 interviewees to have teams that engaged in
direct challenge. Both teams were also recognized as highly functioning PLC groups.
An example of this is in the comment by Interviewee #7: “Because we are considered a
high functioning PLC, we get left alone. People know we are getting work done… We
don’t get messed with. That’s very nice.”

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
120

Table 4.29. Leadership models RC
ID# Interview response related to how organizational leadership models radical
candor.

Summary
7 If I walk into the office of my divisional principal, however, [feedback is]
downright not welcome….
Feedback is not
welcome
3 I became uncomfortable… My different opinion or perspective wasn’t valued,
it was seen as something that needed to be changed or was causing problems
Leadership does
not listen
1 I’ve had the conversations that I’m at a point that I can’t have them any
more. I don’t feel confident …I don’t feel that it would make a difference, I
feel that I would be labelled… I’m just tired… I didn’t feel respected or
heard. People I respect were not being respected or heard. The people that I
knew were making poor decisions for other members or were self-serving
were the voices being heard.
Leadership only
listens to selective
groups
6 • Perhaps because of the size of the school, it feels that the principal and the
[District Office] is here (she shows the quadrant drawn of manipulative
insincerity). When they are present, they are mostly there in a caring role.
Not particularly giving any specific feedback. Just general feedback such
as “Really good”.
• Being familiar with [the needs of the new change] I communicated [our
needs] by email... I have not heard back. So now, I have to go back
tomorrow to find her to talk face to face. If we really are doing this, then
we need [more support].
• maninipulative
insincerity
• lack of follow
through
5 I feel that my relationships in [one division] … I can have conversations
without fear of retribution. We have regular meetings. With [another
division], I also have regular meetings. There, I think there is less
conversation about big topics. More restricted. The principals handle ideas
themselves. It is not welcome to talk about big ideas or topics. [In the third
division] …. I don’t see the leadership. I have had interactions with two of
them. Quite friendly. Nice things to say.
3 teams:
• relationship and
help
• no ability to
discuss problems
• maninipulative
insincerity
8 Because of the structure of the [school], I am assigned to a deputy. My
working relationship with that deputy is quite strong, quite deep…
Strong relationship
2 I found that both in the leadership cohort at the most senior level and with the
principals. It has not been difficult, but rather an open and honest
conversation…. Due to the leadership cohort
Relationship and
help
4 I feel that the principals … are quite straightforward. They help clarify the
process… that it will be taken care of. That’s how I feel about my principal
and department head. They’re handy.

Relationship and
help

It was interesting to note that two of the team leaders with the most capacity to
engage in direct challenge within highly effective teams, were also two of the teachers
who expressed the most strongly that feedback was not welcome by their administrators.
It was interesting to note the comment by Interviewee 1: “People I respect were not being
respected or heard. The people that I knew were making poor decisions for other
members or were self-serving were the voices being heard.”
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
121

Interviewee 6 described a leadership culture of manipulative insincerity and lack
of follow through. Interviewee 5 described differing leadership styles in relationship to
radical candor, varying by division. The perception of Interviewee 5 of specific
leadership teams was the opposite of other teacher leaders, thus demonstrating the
importance of personal relationship in the ability to engage in direct feedback.
Interviewee 8 described a strong relationship with his administrator, but no radical
candor. Interviewee 8, as noted in the values section of this paper, was philosophically
opposed to providing feedback. Interviewees 2 and 4 both purported that administration
was accessible and helped solve problems. It is interesting to note in this context,
however, the following comment by Interviewee 2: “The radical candor at my level has
been about goals and seeking possibilities for me and asking for and receiving support for
my own goals.” While seeking possibilities for oneself is part of self-compassion, it is
interesting to note this comment in relationship to the comment by Interviewee #1: “The
people that I knew who were making poor decisions for other members or were self-
serving were the voices being heard.” While no judgement should be made as to the
quality of decisions of Interviewee 2, her idea of radical candor was self-admittedly self-
serving.
In summary, two teacher leaders who demonstrated throughout this study the
greatest ability to engage teams in direct feedback were also the same that felt that
feedback was not welcome by their administrators. It is interesting to note, that these two
teacher leaders also had a very different perspective of the Superintendent and Assistant
Superintendent. Interviewee #2 stated the following: “… I was asked to be on a [special]
team [to move the school toward 2020 goals]. I was approached by [a Superintendent],
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
122

but I [was not really invited or made to feel welcome by my Principal…] There were a lot
of mixed messages…. I had no voice whatsoever…” The findings also indicated only 2
out of 8 teachers described a relatioship with direct supervisors that helped to solve
problems, albeit personal or organizational.
The majority of teachers expressed some level of frustration at the lack of radical
candor modelled by leadership. It was important to know what topics teacher leaders
found sensitive to be able to estimate which topics direct feedback would be most
inhibiting. Table 4.30 illustrates the findings of which topics were deemed sensitve.
When asked what topic she would not broach with Administration, the first
interviewee immediate responded, “The boys’ club… I will not bring that up…”
Interviewee 3 also related an antecdote in her PLC where the Principal ignored her voice
completely, but when a male team member said exactly the same thing, his voice was
heard and praised.
At one point [in a meeting, ]I said, “I don’t think we agree on the
purpose yet…” [but the meeting just chugged along.] Suddenly a
male colleague said, “I just don’t see that we can move on until
we know the purpose.” The admin confirmed him, while having
ignored me. It was the shittiest professional experience I’ve ever
had. I didn’t have a good relationship with either of them, and so
I didn’t see a way forward, so I let it go.

Interviewee 4 brought forth the perspective of a non-white in the organization.
She described a certain sense of invisibility related to race with the words:
I feel in the school there is always certain people’s voice that is
always heard, and others always just give up and are not heard….
I think there is race issue here… I believe if you talk to any
teacher who is not white in SAS, I think they will share a similar
story.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
123

Table 4.30. Interview responses to sensitive topics

ID#

Interview responses related to sensitive topics raised by teacher leaders

Summary
1 The boy’s club…. I will not bring that up, because I think the boy’s club is
school wide. I don’t believe women are treated as equals.
Gender equality
3 • I seem to have a different opinion than most of my colleagues… [My ideas
were] too different, and then people didn’t want me to be part of the
team. So, then I didn’t feel safe or comfortable talking with colleagues or
admin.
I think in [District Office] there is equality of the genders. I think the
Superintendent tends to bring women into leadership. I see that still in [my
division], I don’t really see it as a problem until that experience, and then I
thought, “Oh, shit, what’s this?
• Differing
perspective or
opinion
• Gender equality
4 I think there is race issue here… I believe if you talk to any teacher who is
not white in SAS, I think they will share a similar story.
Race
5 • Inter-collegial issues that have come up…. If you bring it to admin, then it
appears that your tattling on someone.
• I work for [one] principal, yet I don’t have authority to tell [another]
principal “no” ...
• There are conflicts or differing opinions around scheduling and resources. I
can’t tell people “no” you can’t do that.
• Problems with
colleagues
• conflict over
resources and
schedules
• the ability to say
“no”.
6 What’s hard is having a conversation with admin about a team member that is
struggling.
Colleagues
8 There was a part of [my role] was to be the eyes and ears of the
administration. I have had a very top administrator come and ask me a
question about someone… I have told him to go and observe himself. It’s
a balancing act. I have to have the trust of teachers.
Being asked to
report on teachers
7 • Personnel issues. The biggest issues I see are in Personnel, both in how
certain people are treated with lack of follow through with [the contractual
evaluation process.
• Initiatives/ Initiative fatigue… I feel that all admin is blind to this. With all
the different plans…
Personnel issues;
initiative fatigue
2 I think if it’s always been important, I don’t know that I’d ever held back. If
it’s been important, I don’t think I’ve ever held back. I feel that I can walk in
anyone’s door and have an honest conversation.
Felt free to
advocate for self

Interviewees 5, 6, and 8 (38% of those interviewed) reported that direct
conversations regarding problems with colleagues were challenging. This is an
interesting point to note, especially considering that the data in Motivational Influence #4
suggested that teacher leaders had a greater degree of comfort in providing feedback to
administrators than to teammates. If teacher leaders were to challenge colleagues
directly, would some of this pressure on administration to solve problems between
colleagues be relieved? If the random sampling is truly representative of the
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
124

organization, then could it be that 38% of the bottleneck of teacher leader unsolved
problems would never need to go to administration?
Interviewee 7 continued to be a fascinating study. As the one interviewee who
truly understood how to lead a team in radical candor, it is interesting to note that the
topics he would hesitate to broach with administration have to do with compassion in the
organization. He stated that he cannot approach immediate administration regarding
contractual protection or rights, and he stated clearly that initiative fatigue couldn’t be
brought up to administration. His comments shed light on the previous findings
regarding teacher unwillingness to engage in compassion in the organization. Could it be
that there were organizational roadblocks to compassion?
Interviewee 2 was the only interviewee who felt free to speak her mind as she felt
the need. It is important to remember in this, however, that her definition of radical
candor was based in self-advocacy.
Summary. The survey data demonstrated that teacher leaders did not perceive
their immediate supervisors as modeling radical candor, as such the data validates an
organizational gap around the modeling provided by leadership. The interview data
corroborated, while at the same time providing additional insights:
• Gender and ethnicity were perceived to play a role in whether or not an individual
had voice in the organization; teacher leaders did not feel they could raise these
issues
• Teacher leaders demonstrated reluctance to have conversations with
administration regarding problems with colleagues, yet they had also
demonstrated reluctance to have direct conversations with colleagues.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
125

Assumed organizational influence #3: Stakeholders are rewarded for radical candor.
The level of organizational rewards for engaging in radical candor was evaluated through
survey and interview data.
Survey. Four survey items addressed rewards in the organization for radical
candor. Table 4.31 provides the survey items and responses.

Table 4.31. Rewards for radical candor

Survey Item

Rank (0-10)

N
If I engage in radical candor with someone from Administration, I will
most likely be rewarded in some way.
5.6 29
If I engage in radical candor with someone from Administration, I will
most likely receive a thank you note or an acknowledgement of some
type.
5 29
If I engage in radical candor with someone from Administration, I will
probably be given more responsibility to problem solve.
8.6 29
If I engage in radical candor with my team, my team will be recognized
for the good work we do.

8.2 29

The results of the survey showed that teachers were unlikely to expect a positive
reward or thank you from Administration for engaging in radical candor. They would be
likely, however, expect to take on more responsibility as a result of engaging in radical
candor. While taking on more responsibility could be perceived as a reward for some,
while others may perceive it as the opposite, and as such, it is difficult to determine from
this item whether or not it was considered a reward. Survey data suggested that radical
candor between team members was encouraged by administration. It is interesting to
note that this corresponds to Assumed Motivational Factor #6; teams felt responsibility to
engage in radical candor.
Interview. The interview had a specific question designed to address the topic of
organizational rewards and radical candor. It was as follows: “Do you feel that people
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
126

are rewarded for radical candor at ISE? Can you give me an example of why you feel
this way?” Table 4.32 provides the interview responses. The findings are organized in
descending order from the least demonstratitve of reward to the most indicative of
reward.

Table 4.32. Summary of organizational rewards for radical candor

ID#

Interview response related to rewards for radical candor

Summary
1 I absolutely feel that they are not [rewarded for RC.] I believe it is
punished. Faculty friends who have put their neck out for others, and they
are no longer here. Fired or chose to leave.

Punishment for RC
3 I think some people are [rewarded for RC], but other people are vilified. Punishment;
Voice is limited to
the “in” group
6 If you are consistently questioning decisions for the best interest of
students, I feel that Admin shuts down on that person and doesn’t want to
hear it. I have seen people who speak out with fully justified opinions
whose intent is around the kids, who are not invited to meetings and are
shut down.
Punishment for RC
Voice is limited to
the “in” group
4 I feel in the school there is always certain people’s voice that is always
heard, and others always just give up and are not heard.
Voice is limited to
the “in” group
7 Radical Candor is only appreciated when it makes someone look good in
front of parents …. “Hey, you need to look out for this…” and it gives
them a heads up ahead of time, or makes them look progressive.
Limited appreciation
of RC
8 I have seen examples when Admin has been thankful to [people in my role]
for bringing these things up. [A certain administrator] can put his back up,
but I have learned that once he has digested it, he says thank you. It never
was resolved, however. There are only 24 hours in a day.
Limited appreciation
for RC
5 It’s about position [and contract]. When I talk to Admin, I get something
like, “OK, you’re telling me the problem, do you have a solution?” Is the
response I tend to get. It puts the ball in my court. Sometimes, I think if
you’re looking for a way out and need help, then you don’t get it.
Dead end
2 The radical candor at my level has been about goals and seeking
possibilities for me and asking for and receiving support for my own
goals.

Self-advocacy

Three of 8 interviewees (38%) expressed the idea that radical candor was not only
not rewarded, but was, in fact punishable in the organization. Another 38% of
interviewees stated that voice was limited to the “in” group. Two interviewees (25% of
the randomly selected population) indicated some limited appreciation or reward for
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
127

radical candor. One Interviewee described neither reward nor punishment, per say,
simply a dead end. Interviewee 2 described reward for self-advocacy.
Summary. Survey data indicated that teacher leaders would expect rewards for
engaging in radical candor in and among team members, a finding that mirrored the
responsibility of teams to engage in radical candor. When analyzing the ability of
administration to model radical candor and reward it, however, teacher leaders
consistently described punishment and limited solutions to candid feedback. In regard to
the building of relationships, Interviewee 3 stated clearly her perspective, “Sometimes, I
think it’s a numbers thing. There are just so many people here.”
Assumend organizatioanl influence #4: Resources are allotted to the building of a
culture of radical candor. The researcher requested the documents indicating the budget
spent on building teams and working on PLC work in the institution. Unfortunately,
however, she did not receive the documents for analysis. The observation of the
researcher, however, over a six year span of time was that a great deal of resources were
spent on both axes of the radical candor construct: personal care and direct challenge.
In the area of personal care, a great deal of organizational resource went to team
building, the creation of norms within teams and StrengthsFinders as a means of helping
people develop relationship and respect differeing perspectives. Laura Lipton workshops
also taught teacher leaders how to solicit voice in team meetings. Administrative teams
consistently spent time on helping to bring together team relationships, and the
organization spent a great deal of funds on events meant to provide social time for those
working in the school.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
128

In regard to direct challenge, the school invested heavily in workshops and
conferences regarding the effective use of data in PLCs. The administrative teams spent
a great deal of their personal time, as well, supporting a data-based evidence approach of
student learning.
While the institution invested a great deal on both axes separately, very little has
been invested on the intersection of the two axes. A few presentations were made to
teacher leaders regarding the book “Candid Conversations”. A few presentations were
made to all faculty meetings where the intersection of radical candor was addressed in
part, though never specifically mentioned as a construct.
The resources mentioned were resultant merely of the observation of the
researcher. Considering that no documentation was available for analysis, there is
inconclusive evidence to indicate an organizational gap or a lack thereof around the use
of resources for radical candor at ISE.
Summary of organizational influences
The assumed organizational influences affecting the culture of radical candor at
ISE are listed in Table 4.33. An overview of the results for the organization are also
presented.
Summary of KMO Assumed Influences
Table 4.34 provides an overarching map of the institution in regard to a culture of
radical candor based on the assumed influences and validations for the KMO. The
validated results of the study indicated knowledge gaps across the board on the part of
teacher leaders related to a culture of radical candor. It was determined that there is a
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
129

Table 4.33. Summary of organizational influences

Assumed Organizational Influence
Validation
of Gap
1 Leadership communicates the need for candor Yes
2 Leadership models radical candor by listening without defensiveness,
reporting back when changes are made as a result of candor, building
relationships, and admitting mistakes.
Yes
3 Stakeholders are rewarded for radical candor Yes
4 Resources are allotted to the building of a culture of radical candor (RC) Inconclusive

Table 4.34. Map of the KMO of the organization related to radical candor

Validated Knowledge Influences
Validated
Motivation Influences
Validated
Organizational Influences
Identify types of feedback
and compassion.
Yes Confidence to engage in
feedback
Yes Communication of
the goal
Yes
Identify the organizational
goal for RC
Yes Confidence to engage in
compassion
? Leadership models
RC
Yes
Identify how the team may
respond to feedback.
Yes Confidence in team to
engage in feedback
Yes Rewards for RC Yes
Understanding of own
self-compassion.
? Responsibility for
feedback lies within
oneself
Yes Resources allotted
to RC
?
Understand connection
between feedback,
compassion and team
behaviors.
Yes Responsibility to extend
compassion to others
Yes
Can solicit feedback
personally and in meetings
Yes Onus for candor within
teams
No
Can help colleagues
understand self-
compassion.
Yes Values & goal alignment No
Can implement a culture
of RC.
Yes
Can reflect on areas of
strength and growth for
feedback and compassion.
Yes
Can communicate the
implications of candor in
relation to the goal.
Yes

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
130

need to further analyze instrumentation for the construct of understanding self-
compassion.
Regarding motivation, the results indicated that teacher leaders lacked confidence
engaging in radical candor. The results also demonstrated that teacher leaders lacked a
sense of personal responsibility for engaging in radical candor, although as teams they
demonstrated a sense of shared responsibility for engaging in feedback. Teacher leaders
perceived radical candor as being in alignment with tasks and goals, although they
appeared to be facing organizational barriers.
Organizational barriers to the achievement of the goal were threefold. First, there
was not a clear, communicated goal of radical candor. Second, there was a lack of
modeling of radical candor in middle management. Finally, the rewards were not in
place to encourage a culture of radical candor. It was not determined whether or not
sufficient resources were allotted to the attainment of the goal.
A summary of the study is provided in the following chapter. Recommendations
based on the organizational map provided in Table 4.33 are also presented in Chapter 5.
Limitations encountered due to certain aspects of the instrumentation are also addressed
as well as recommendations for further research.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
131

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, IMPLEMENTATION, AND EVALUATION

Radical candor presents a model in which high levels of direct challenge intersect
with equally high levels of personal care, thus creating an organizational culture where
feedback can help both the organization and individuals grow toward maximum potential
(Scott, 2017). This study analyzed the knowledge, motivation and organizational
behaviors (KMO) necessary to create a culture of radical candor at the International
School for Expatriates (ISE). Radical candor is needed in order for ISE to achieve its
organizational goal of creating personalized learning paths that enable all students to
learn at a high level.
This chapter first presents the organizational ideal. This ideal is based in the
review of literature and delineates the knowledge, motivational, and organizational
components to radical candor. Second, the current state of the organization, as revealed
by the data discussed in Chapter 4, is presented. Third, recommendations specific to the
organizational needs are presented. These recommendations are based in the Kirpatrick
New World model (Kirkpatrich & Kirkpatrick, 2016) and are based in the needs of the
organization as delineated in Chapter 4. Last, limitations and delimitations to the study
will be presented.
The Organizational Ideal
The mission and goals of ISE are summarized in Table 5.1. In order for ISE to
achieve the organizational goal, it is important that all stakeholders can see and measure
the distance to the goal. It is also important that all stakeholders engage in radically
candid conversations regarding what the data reveal to ensure iterative improvement
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
132

Table 5.1. Mission and goals of the organization
Organizational Mission
The International School for Expatriates is committed to being a world leader in education by
creating personalized learning paths allowing all students to learn at high levels.
Organizational Performance Goal
The goal of ISE is to create an organizational culture of radical candor that will allow for the
continued innovation necessary for the school to fulfill its mission.
Administrators Teacher Leaders Teacherd Instructional Assistantd
By December 2018,
100% of Administrators
will model behaviors and
reinforce a culture of
radical candor.
By November 2018,
100% of Teacher Leaders
will model the techniques
of Radical Candor within
their respective PLC
groups, and with their
Instructional Assistants.
By November 2018,
100% of Teachers will
model the techniques of
radical candor during
conversations regarding
student outcomes.
By November 2018, 100%
of Instructional Assistants
model the techniques of
radical candor during
conversations regarding
student outcomes .

toward the goal. (Lencioni, 2010; Scott, 2017). This study analyzed the culture of ISE
regarding radical candor, and as such, broke down radical candor into its respective
components of knowledge, motivation and organizational behaviors. Figure 5.1 provides
an illustration of the ideal of the organization.

Figure 5.1. The ideal of the organization
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
133

The Current State of the Organization
This study focused on the disparate components of radical candor within the
organization. Clark and Estes (2006) recommended, when faced with gaps in each of the
areas of knowledge, motivation and organizational barriers, solutions begin in the area of
motivation. The findings revealed a strong sense of motivation for radical candor within
ISE. For example, stakeholders sensed that a culture of radical candor was in alignment
with goals as well as in alignment with values. Stakeholders also expressed confidence
in the ability of their teams to engage in radical candor.
Nevertheless, two areas of motivation were validated as gaps. One area of
weakness was that of personal responsibility, whereas the other was that of personal
confidence. All areas of organizational behaviors and knowledge were validated as gaps.
Figure 5.2 illustrates the findings of the study. Areas in black represent gaps or “blocks”
to the organization’s ability to use radical candor to assist in achieving its goal. The area
in white (or transparent) represents the area in which the organization reveals ability, and
represent the aspects that do not act as “blocks” to achieve the goal.

Figure 5.2. The reality of the organization
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
134

Rationale for the Recommendations
The recommendations for practice are illustrated as a four-step process as shown
in Figure 5.3: These four steps are listed as followed and are explained in detail.
1. Ensure access to data
2. Address organizational barriers
3. Analyze the change in motivation (based upon actions in Step 2)
4. Create professional development opportunities based on findings
The order of the recommendations is unusual. Normally, recommendations begin
with addressing motivational factors (Clark & Estes, 2008). In this case, motivation is not
addressed as a first matter of business for three reasons. First, the gap anaylsis suggested
that stakeholder motivation was high in most areas. Second, interview data revealed
findings that teacher leaders seemed hesitant to engage in radically candid conversations
with the leadership teams directly above them. The interview data pointed to a
possibility that

Figure 5.3. Action steps to teach the goal
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
135

motivation may have been negatively affected by behaviors within the leadership teams.
Interview findings revealed a parallel with the findings of Morrison and Milliken (2003)
who posited that stakeholders are often afraid to engage in feedback for fear of negative
consequences or a lack of belief that what they say will make a difference. A third reason
for the change in the order of recommendations is based on findings that suggested
teachers experienced confusion as to the subject of radically candid conversations.
Survey data revealed most teachers did not believe that student performance data should
be a topic of conversation. Interview data reflected a similar sense of confusion about the
topic of a radically candid conversation. The results of the findings led to the first step
recommendation: Ensure access to the right, or correct, data.
Having the right data will enable stakeholders to introspect current performance,
and provide focus on the radically candid conversations. Access to the right data ensures
a means to measure progress toward the organizational goal. The degree to which
stakeholders have access to the right data could be ascertained through a second gap
analysis or an ongoing project that is foundational and, in many ways, symbiotic with the
work of creating a culture of radical candor. The recommendations in Step 1 will provide
a rationale for access to data as being a first step recommendation and will also provide
an example of a possible data solution within the context of the organizational goal.
Step 2 addresses underlying factors that may be affecting motivation. The gap
areas for motivation are those of personal confidence and personal responsibility for
radical candor. Interviewees revealed a reluctance to engage in open conversations with
mid-level management, thus eroding the sense of personal confidence and responsibility
for engaging in radically candid conversations (Morrison & Milliken, 2003).
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
136

Interviewees also spoke of a lack of relationship with the mid-level administration. It is
unlikely that the personal aspects of motivation will change unless organizational barriers
in management are removed. As a result, organizational barriers are addressed in Step 2.
Once Step 2 is implemented, it will be important to analyze the results. It is
imperative to answer the question: “Were motivational barriers to radical candor removed
as a result of the work done in Step 2?” The reflective analysis completed in Step 3 will
help inform the creation of Professional Development for Step 4.
Step 4 addresses needs and ideas for professional development. Clark and Estes
(2006) explained that professional development can be an effective intervention for
knowledge-based gaps. Based upon the analysis of work toward the goal of radical
candor, it will be important to continue to iteratively analyze needs within the
organization and to tailor PD to the specific knowledge and skill needs of ISE. Step 4
also provides general recommendations for the development of PD.
Recommendations for Practice
The recommendations in this study were developed with the New World Model
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) for program evaluation in mind. Having the larger
organizational goal in mind is considered Level 4 in the New World Kirkpatrick model
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick). The Kirkpatrick model then analyzes Level 3, or the
behaviors within the organization that support the desired actions toward the goal. Level
2 addresses the knowledge needed to achieve the goal, and Level 1 addresses the level of
satisfaction with the training, and the degree to which participants perceived the training
as relevant to their work.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
137

In this study, Action step 1 first addresses the highest-level goal of the Kirkpatrick
model, because the first call of order is to ensure that the focus of radically candid
conversations is on the attainment of the organizational goal. Action Steps 2 and 3
address Level 3 of the Kirkpatrick model, or the behaviors within the organization.
Action Step 4 addresses Levels 1 and 2 of the Kikpatrick model, or the knowledge
needed to achieve the goal and the satisfaction with the training.
Recommendations for Further Study
The recommendations in this study were developed with the Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016) New World Model for program evaluation in mind. Having the larger
organizational goal in mind is considered level 4 of the New World Kirkpatrick model
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The Kirkpatrick model then analyzes level 3, or the
behaviors within the organization that support the desired actions toward the goal. Level
2 addresses the knowledge needed to achieve the goal, and Level 1 addresses the level of
satisfaction with the training, and the degree to which participants perceived the training
as relevant to their work
Step #1: Backward design from the overarching goal
The first step of the recommendation process is to remember the end goal of the
organization (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The goal of ISE is to be a world leader
in education by creating personalized learning pathways so that all students can achieve
at high levels. Radically candid teams need to engage in difficult conversations around
measurable goals (Lencioni, 2010; Scott, 2017). What is the capacity of each team in the
organization to effectively measure the learning of all students in a personalized
pathway? The ability to effectively measure the learning trajectory of each and every
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
138

student is foundational to the organization reaching its goals (Jung, 2018). It is this
measurable goal that needs to be at the heart of the radically candid conversations in the
school. If a culture of radical candor develops about the lunch menu, for example, while
it may be radically candid, it would not help ISE achieve its goal of creating personalized
learning pathways so that all students can achieve at high levels. In like manner, if a
student follows a unique and creative pathway for which there is no measure of progress,
then there will be no way to ensure that the learning experience was meaningful or if it
was just an underwater basket weaving experience. For this reason, the first
recommendation is to ensure valid and reliable data of external and internal indicators
toward the achievement of the organizational goal.
Table 5.2 provides recommendations for the analysis of the organizational goal
based in external indicators, and the leading outcomes, metrics and means of measuring
the internal indicators of progress toward the organizational goal are illustrated in Table
5.3. Clear data and metacognition based on mastery-based learning progressions
dominate the top of the table for both internal and external indicators. The organizational
goal of high levels of student achievement in personalized learning trajectories requires
new ways of looking at student progress toward goals. For this reason, the first section of
this recommendation is based on data analysis of personalized learning trajectories: how
to validate these data against external measures, and how to measure student
metacognition, or understanding of the progressions.
The second part of this section provides a framework to analyze the perception of
the community and the students based on the personalized learning experience at ISE.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
139

Table 5.2. Recommendations based on external indicators
External Indicators
Leading Outcomes Metric Method
Students demonstrate progress
in learning progressions
Clearly defined K-12 learning
progressions for content and
DSLOs
Ongoing tracking of student growth in
relationship to learning goals in data
system
Students demonstrate
excellence in the DSLOs and
learning
Pisa Scores Random selection of students yearly
External tests of student
achievement across varied y
subject matter
Annual external assessments of
student achievement
The community perceives a
culture of personalized
learning for students
Checklist to be created by
teachers and administrators that
identifies specific aspects of a
personalized learning culture
· Mid year survey
· Ongoing random selection of parents
for interview
· 4 annual open invitation parent
coffee forums across divisions

Table 5.3. Recommendations based on internal indicators
Internal Indicators
Leading Outcome Method Metric
Students demonstrate
progress in learning
progressions
Clearly defined K-12 learning
progressions for content and DSLOs
Ongoing analysis of student growth in
relationship to learning goals in data
system within PLCs
Students know their next
steps for learning.
Learning progressions to be created
by teacher leader representatives and
administrators
· Ongoing random selection of
students for interview
· Mid year student survey
Students perceive that
they are known and cared
for.
Checklist to be created by PLC
groups, counsellors and
administrators
· Ongoing random selection of
students for interview
· Mid year student survey

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
140

Step 1 recommendations are organized as follows:
• Provide an example of a Mastery Based Learning Progression (MBLP)
o Ensure the validity and reliability of MBLP data
o Apply measures of student agency/ metacognition resultant from the MBLP
• Include Community and Student Perceptions of the Personalization of Learning
An example of a Mastery Based Learning Progressions (MBLP). In order to
achieve the organizational goal that all students achieve high levels of learning toward
personalized goals, it will be important to have new ways of seeing student learning data.
Students, teachers, and community members will need clear and consistent learning
progressions that span across the K-12 system. Students, teachers, and parents will need
on-going access to live updates to growth in the mastery-based progression by students.
The emergence of data systems for mastery-based learning progressions have
been piloted at ISE. The use of one such system, MasteryTrack, was piloted by the
Elementary Spanish program in the 2017-18 school year. The pilot provided an example
of how PLCs can use data analysis to analyze growth for all students in personalized
learning progressions over specified lengths of time. The first step is to identify a clear,
backward plan for a learning progression. In the case of the Spanish program, the
backward plan for fluency in Spanish was based on the framework provided by the
American Association for the Teaching of Foreign Language (ACTFL), the Oral
Proficiency Interview (OPI), and the ACTFL Assessment of Performance toward
Proficiency in Languags (AAPPL). These general frameworks were broken down into
small, discrete pieces that were placed into the Mastery Track data system. Figures 5.4
and 5.5 depict the process of how to take a student from acquiring her first word in
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
141

Source: Provided by Public Schools of North Carolina, State Board of Education, 2015. Retrieved from
https://www.slideserve.com/john/actfl-proficiency-levels
Figure 5.4. Original framework

Figure 5.5. Juxtoposed framework with discrete learning objectives
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
142

Spanish up to bilingualism. Figure 5.4 shows the original framework which—when
combined with ACTFL, OPI and AAPPL standards—resulted in Figure 5.5.
While Figure 5.4 was crafted by the Public Schools of North Carolina, and based
on the work of ACTFL, Figure 5.5 illustrates specific and demonstrabable learning
objectives embedded within each of the levels. These levels were identified by
juxtoposing OPI and AAPPL standards for respective and corresponding levels, and
making them discrete, specific, and demonstable.
Figure 5.6 provides a data view of progress toward mastery in this learing
progression for a small group of Spanish students. The time measured is from January
15, 2018 until March 15, 2018.

Figure 5.6. Progress toward mastery (January 15, 2018 - March 15, 2018)
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
143

The MasteryTrack data view reveals that all students demonstrated mastery of at
least one new learning objective during the time period. Two students demostrated
mastery of two new learning objectives, and 3 students demonstrated progress toward
three new learning objectives. The one student who showed progress toward 36 learning
objectives was a new student, and so the establishment of his baseline data shows within
the date range, but does not reflect his learning during the time period. While Table 70
represents a small sample of students, it is possible to use this function to view the
entirety of the program at one glance.
A view of the same set of data from the teacher’s view of a class is illustrated in
Figure 5.7. By clicking into the green “1” in the N4 column, teachers can see the
definition of the objective mastered. In this case, all of the objectives mastered in the N4
category were the same. The differing learning objectives mastered in the I1- I4 range;
however, they reflect the need for a personalized learning trajectory for students.

Figure 5.7. Teacher view of progress toward Mastery
(January 15, 2018 - March 15, 2018)
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
144

Student 2 was the same new student represented in the Table 5.2. All of his perceived
growth is simply new information recorded during that time in order to establish his
baseline data and in so doing, know his next steps for learning. While Figures 5.4 and
5.5 show the growth within a period of time, the overall view of class data as of March
15
th
, 2018 is depicted in Figure 5.8.

Figure 5.8. Overall view of student mastery as of March 15, 2018
The white numbers in the green boxes represent the number of objectives
mastered in each category. The white numbers in the purple boxes indicate the number
of objectives yet to be mastered. This view allows teachers to see at a glance the next
steps for learning for each student. There are additional functions that allow teachers to
click on a purple or a green box, and in so doing, see the exact definition of the learning
objective indicated.
Last, yet equally important, a well-developed data system has the capacity to
replace traditional forms of reporting or grades. Rather than basing evaluation on a curve
against other students, or against stagnant standards of class objectives that do not respect
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
145

what a student may or may not know when entering a class, the system provides a real-
time, live report of objectives mastered and the next steps for learning. It is available on-
line through log in to both students and parents. Figure 5.9 provides a view of the I1/ I2
portion of the student and parent view for Student 7.

Figure 5.9. Student 7’s view of objectives mastered and the next steps for learning
The pilot of the MasteryTrack has demonstrated how the school can effectively
analyze data from differing viewpoints to see whether or not all students are achieving
high levels of learning in personalized learning trajectories. Therefore, the first
recommendation is to invest in a system of data analysis based in mastery-based learning
progressions to ensure a means of measurement of the organizational goal.
Validity of MBLP data: Triangulation with external data points. While systems
of data analysis of student progress toward goals can create unprecedented oportunity to
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
146

view data, it is important to ensure that the data is valid and reliable. For this reason, it is
recommended that ISE continue external evaluations and triangulate data from
instruments such as the Pisa and instruments of academic achievement to corresponding
objectives and mastery-based learning progression data.
Measures of student agency. Increased student efficacy can increase
performance (Pajares, 1996), and metacognition can improve learning (Mayer, 2011;
Pintrich, 1999). While consistent access to a mastery-based learning progressions and
next steps for learning for students, teachers, and parents would seem to provide a strong
base for efficacy and metacognition, it will be important to know whether or not students
understand the meaning of it, and if so, to what level. For this reason, it is recommended
that ISE create a task force to create instruments that measure student efficacy and
metacognition around the learning progressions. In like manner, it will be important to
measure the understandings of the parent community.
Community and student perceptions of the personalization of learning.
While the implementation of a data base can provide a great deal of information about a
student’s next steps for learning, it is important to remember that the social and emotional
sides of how data is used can be just as important as the information that it provides. The
way a teacher interacts with a student in regard to the learning progression can
demonstrate a deep level of personalized care or can demonstrated a machine-like
obsession with filling in a database. The level of comfort of the teacher in implementing
the system, as well as the level of understanding of social emotional learning (SEL) can
greatly affect student perceptions of community and personal care (Collie et al, 2012). It
would be ironic if the search for the personalization of learning really created an
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
147

impersonal robotization of the learning process due to poor implementation. Therefore, it
will be important to ensure the social emotional side of the implementation through
surveys of parents and students, the random selections of interviews for students, and
invitation to parents for open forums through parent coffees.
Summary of step #1 recommendations. It is recommended that ISE first create
systems that allow all stakeholders to understand the next steps toward the achievement
of the goal. The recommendations for Step 1 are:
• Create or adopt K-12 mastery-based learning progressions.
• Adopt a system of data analysis that allows administrators, teachers, students and
parents to see relevant data to make in-time decisions that positively effect the
achievement of the organizational goal.
• Corraborate the system of data analysis with external measures of achievement to
analyze validity and reliability of measures
• Analyze student metacognition surrounding the next steps for learning
• Analyze student and parent perceptions regarding the personalization of learning
Step #2: Addressing the organizational barriers
Step #2 involves the removal of organizational barriers to a culture of radical
candor. Chapter 4 revealed organizational barriers across the board to a culture of radical
candor; the areas studied were the communication of the goal, the modelling of RC by
leadership, the rewards for RC, and the resources for RC. It his highly unlikely that
stakeholders will engage in direct challenge or feedback as long as these barriers are in
existence (Morrison & Milliken, 2003).
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
148

An interesting note that emerged in the interview data was that teacher leaders
expressed a tendency to engage in a feedback process and had a sense a caring
relationship with the Superintendent and the Assistant Superintendent, yet these same
teacher leaders expressed fear of reprisal and lack of care when engaging in similar
conversations with mid-level management. Therefore, the population for the
organizational barriers to be addressed focuses mainly on mid-level management. It his
highly unlikely that stakeholders will engage in direct challenge or feedback as long as
barriers in management are in existence (Morrison & Milliken, 2003).
The first recommendation of Step #2 is to conduct a gap analysis of the mid-level
management to see what knowledge, motivation or organizational barriers may be
inhibiting a culture of radical candor. The second recommendation would be to follow
the gap analysis with the Kirkpatrick New World model of evaluation. Once that is
complete, Table 5.4 lists the critical behaviors necessary in administration in order for the
teachers to be able to engage in the critical behaviors that result in radical candor.
The behaviors of the mid-level management will need to be supported and
encouraged by the office of the Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent. Table 5.5
illustrates the different methods through which the behaviors may be supported by means
of reinforcing, encouraging and rewarding.
Summary of step #2 recommendations. The removal of organizational barriers
to radical candor is dependent upon behavioral changes in mid level management. As
such, the recommedations are as follows:
• Gap analysis of mid-level management around a culture of radical candor
• Create Kirkpatrick backward plan that enables administration to engage in radical
candor
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
149

Table 5.4. Critical managerial behaviors for the implementation of radical candor
Critical Behavior Metric Method Timing
1. Principals communicate the
need for radical candor
Teachers understand that
leadership values radical
candor
Administration will
admister a survey similar to
the one in the Chapter 4 Gap
Analysis
Mid-year
2. Principals model radical
candor by listening without
defensiveness, reporting back
when changes are made as a
result of candor, building
relationships, and admitting
mistakes.
Teachers percieve a strong
relationship of care with
administration.
Teachers percieve that real
feedback is welcome with
administration
Administration will admister
a survey similar to the one in
the Chapter 4 Gap Analysis
Mid-year
3. Principals reward
stakeholders for radical candor
Teachers percieve that
radical candor will be
rewarded by adminstration.
Administration will admister
a survey similar to the one in
the Chapter 4 Gap Analysis
Mid-year
4. Principals provide resources
to the building of a culture of
radical candor (RC)
Teachers use the principles
of radical candor in teams.
Qualitative data; interviews
with a random selection of
teacher leaders.
Survey data
Mid-year
and end of
year

• Create evaluative systems to gauge teacher perception of administration in regard
to radical candor
• Support the critical behaviors of administration in the implementation of radical
candor

Step #3: Analyze the effect on motivation
Step #3 was added in this study in direct response to the findings in Chapter 4.
Analysis of motivational factors indicated that teacher leaders had confidence in their
teams to engage in RC, and indicated that RC was in line with their values and goals.
However, they expressed a lack of personal confidence or responsibility to engage in
RC.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
150

Table 5.5. Support of critical behaviors
Method Timing Critical Behaviors
Supported
Reinforcing
Superintendent’s Office collects and analyzes teacher surveys. Mid-year 1, 2, 3, 4
The Superintendent’s Office provides a job aid for teacher
leader feedback to Principals regarding interactions
Ongoing 2
The Superintendent’s Office provides Principals the time to
discuss specific needs for the implementation of RC;
resources are provided as needed
Beginning of the year
and mid year
4
Encouraging
Administrative team gathers and discusses progress toward
RC
Montly 1, 2, 3, 4
Administrative team finds teacher leaders who can thank
Principals for RC
Monthly 1, 2, 3, 4
Rewarding
Superintendent publicly gives specific examples of how
radical candor has made a positive difference.
Quarterly 1, 2, 3
Superintendent privately thanks individuals for engaging in
radical candor
Ongoing 1, 2, 3

The interview data suggested that this was due in large part to organizational barriers
perceived to be in mid-level management. Once the organizational barriers are addressed
in Step #2, it is recommended that the organization re-assess to see if there are still any
motivational gaps, and to determine if the source of the gaps are derivative of
organizational barriers or knowledge gaps. It will also be important to investigate further
means of evaluating levels of self-compassion and compassion for others. Feedback is
only one half of radical candor (Kim & Vich, 2016; Scott, 2017). Feedback must be
based in personal care, and as such improved instrumentation for the constructs of self-
compassion and compassion for others is recommended.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
151

Summary of step #3 recommendations. Step #3 strives to make explicit one of
the iterative aspects of Kirkpatrick’s Level 3 analysis of organizational behaviors. The
summary of recommendations are as follows:
• Re-assess motivational factors in the implementation of RC after removing
organizational barriers.
• Investigate improved forms of instrumentation around compassion and self-
compassion for a stronger base in the personal care side of RC

Step #4: Professional development for radical candor
Step #4 addresses Kirkpatrick’s Levels 2 and 1 of evaluation: professional
development and satisfaction regarding training, respectively. Table 5.6 provides an
itemized list of learning goals in order to achieve a culture of radical candor.
The learning goals presented in Table 5.6 were based on the literature review
provided in Chapter 2, in which radical candor was recognized as having three main parts
for evaluation: compassion, feedback, and the intersection of personal care and feedback
(Kim & Vich, 2018; Scott, 2017). These three points of radical candor were analyzed

Table 5.6. Learning goals for administration and teacher leaders

Learning Goals Admin Date Teacher Date
Describe compassion for self and others Aug. 2018 Mar. 2018
Describe direct challenge Aug. 2018 Mar. 2018
Explain radical candor Aug. 2018 Mar. 2018
Generate ideas for engaging in radical candor Aug. 2018 Mar. 2018
Value radical candor as a means of reaching organizational goals Aug. 2018 Mar. 2018
Attribute the need to engage in radical candor to oneself Aug. 2018 Mar. 2018
Feel that radical candor is important in the organization Aug. 2018 Mar. 2018
Be confident in the ability to engage in radical candor Aug. 2018 Mar. 2018

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
152

through a hierarchy of types of knowledge and motivation (Ambrose et. Al, 2010;
Anderman & Anderman, 2011; Eccles, 2009; Rueda, 2011; Weiner, 1985).
Table 5.7 illustrates methods and activities used to evaluate whether or not the
learning goals in Table 5.6 have been attained. The suggestions presented are based in a
summary of the Kirkpatrick New World Model as provided in video format by Dr. Ken

Table 5.7. Methods and activities that assess the attainment of learning goals
Methods or Activities Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it”
Knowledge check using multiple choice During and after
Think individually and share with partner During
Procedural “I can do it”
Role plays During the workshop
Simulations During the workshop
Attitude “I believe this matters”
Discussions of the value and rationale During the workshop
Discussions of issues During the workshop
Observations of PLC training of RC During the workshop
Confidence “I think I can do it”
Discussion in small groups of concerns, barriers, etc. During the workshop
Mentorship, coaching, peer check ins Monthly meetings for teacher leaders/ administration
Q&A in pairs Monthly meetings for teacher leaders/ administration
Sliding scale survey items Bi-annually
Commitment
Discussion of issues/ praise if appropriate Ongoing
Self-report of progress Bi-annually
Action plans Bi-annually

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
153

Yates. Table 5.8 delineates Level 1 of the New World Kirpatrick Model, and the
reactions to training (https://vimeo.com/user7858084/review/210643049/9b34673da5).
Summary of step #4 recommendations. Step #1 presents an outline of training
needs as well as an outline to determine training effectiveness and satisfaction in regard
to the training. The recommendations are as follows:
• Plan a training session based in the list of items in Table 5.6
• Evaluate the effectiveness of the training session based in the list of items in
Table 5.7
• Analyze reactions to the training based in the list of items in Table 5.8

Table 5.8. Reactions to training in RC

Method Timing
Engagement
Attendance At the beginning of the
workshop
Asking meaningful questions During the workshop
Completion of practice scenarios After workshop
Relevance
Pulse check via survey and/ or discussion Before and after breaks
Anonymous survey End of the workshop
Customer Satisfaction
Dedicated observer who gauges student commentary and body language During training session
Source: Taken from instructional video by Kenneth Yates:
https://vimeo.com/user7858084/review/210643049/9b34673da5
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
154

Limitations and Delimitations
This study was conducted with the following limitations and delimations. These
factors should be considered when using the findings for practice or research.
Limitations
One of the limitations of the study is the self selection of the group. While the
number (76) is high in percentage to the entirety of the faculty (375), the process of self
selection may influence the response of participants and the resultant data. The group of
the leadership cohort was self chosen and as such, were teacher leaders, many of whom
were aspiring to the next rung on the professional ladder. Therefore, responses to
questions about candor may have been influenced. On the other hand, these were the
groups of leaders best positioned to influence the future of the organization, and as such,
this was a very accurate representation of the current and future teacher leadership of the
school.
A second limitation is that only 36% of the leadership cohort answered all of the
survey questions. It is difficult to determine if there were any commonalities in the
population that answered all of the questions and those that chose not to answer or to
answer partially.
A third limitation is the instrumentation regarding compassion and self-
comapassion. The data of the gap analysis were inconclusive about stakeholders’
understanding of their own levels of self-compassion as well as their confidence to
engage in self-compassion. Self-compassion is directly related to the ability to recognize
one’s own mistakes or shortcomings as part of the common human experience (Neff,
2003). Self-compassion and compassion for others form a strong part of the care
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
155

personally axis of the radical candor framework (Vick & Kim, 2016). While Neff (2003)
established valid instrumentation of self-compassion, it would be interesting to develop
an instrument or specific interview questions that analyze participant metacognition and
confidence when engaging in self-compassion and compassion.
Delimitations
This study was a gap analysis, case study of one organization. Therefore, while it
may suggest possibilities inherent in the process of implementing a culture of candor at
other schools, it is not generalizable beyond the context of teacher leaders at ISE. The
choice to focus on teacher leaders as the main group of stakeholders limited the ability to
generalize perceptions beyond teacher leaders to include support staff, other faculty, or
administration. As such, the findings represented in this study did not represent the
culture of ISE, but rather the culture of teacher leaders within ISE.
A continuation of the study within the context of ISE would be to conduct two
more gap analyses. One gap analysis would be centered on the mid-level management of
the school and the culture of radical candor. It will be important to know what the needs
of the management team might be in order to establish and model a culture of radical
candor. Another topic of future inquiry would be a gap analysis based on creating a
school culture that iteratively uses appropriate data to inform instruction as a means of
personalizing learning for all students. It would also be interesting to determine if a
similar type of gap analysis of a culture of radical candor might be conducted across
different schools. It would be interesting to see if trends were similar or different, and
what the implications may be for education in general.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
156

Conclusion
The gap analysis created by Clark and Estes (2008) was applied in this research to
analyze the knowledge, motivation, and organizational behaviors necessary in teacher
leaders at ISE to engage in a culture of radical candor and, consequently, the capacity of
the organization to reach its goal of creating personalized learning paths allowing all
students to achieve at high levels. The study results and recommendations are
summarized in Figure 5.10.

Figure 5.10. Summary of the results and recommendations

The analysis of knowledge and organizational factors showed that there were
roadblocks to the implementation of radical candor at ISE. The analysis of motivational
factors resulted in a mixed bag of results. Teacher leaders had confidence in their teams
to engage in radical candor, and they perceived that radical candor was in alignment with
values and goals. There was a lack of personal confidence and sense of responsibility,
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
157

however in engaging in radical candor. Semi-structured interview data pointed to
strained relationships with mid-level management.
The recommendations of the study were placed into four steps. First step
recommendations are based on the need to establish clear access to data that will enable
all stakeholders within the organization to evaluate achievement toward the
organizational goal. The second step of recommendations focuses on the removal of
organizational barriers to candid feedback. The third step provides a re-evaluation of
needs, and the fourth step delineates a plan for professional development.
Perhaps few goals are as lofty or as complicated as that of ISE—that all students
would learn at high levels in personalized learning pathways. It would be the hope of this
researcher that iterative and purposeful planning around a culture of radical candor will
provide a roadmap for educational culture that enables an iterative, purposeful, open and
caring discussion in the face of the on-going struggle of educational innovation.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
158

REFERENCES

Adler, P. S. (2001). Market, hierarchy, and trust: The knowledge economy and the future
of capitalism. Organization science, 12(2), 215-234.
Agocs, C. (1997). Institutionalized resistance to organizational change: Denial, inaction,
and repression. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 917-931.
Allen, T. D., Poteat, L. & Shockley, K. M.(2010). Protégé anxiety attachment and
feedback in mentoring relationships. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(1), 73-
80.
Alvani, S. M., Nikmaram, S., Shojaii, S., Yamchi, H. G., Zahrani, M. A., & (2012). Study
on relationship between organizational silence and commitment in Iran. World
Applied Sciences Journal, 17(10), 1271-1277.
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., Lovett, M. C., DiPietro, M., & Norman, M. K. (2010).
How learning works: 7 research-based principles for smart teaching.
Anderman, E. and Anderman, L. (2009). Attribution theory. Education.com. Retrieved
from http://www.education.com/reference/article/attribution-theory/
Ashford, S. J. (1986). Feedback-seeking in individual adaptation: A resource perspective.
Academy of Management journal, 29(3), 465-487.
Ashford, S. J., Blatt, R., & Walle, D. V. (2003). Reflections on the looking glass: A
review of research on feedback-seeking behavior in organizations. Journal of
Management, 29(6), 773-799.
Ashford, S. J., & Tsui, A. S. (1991). Self-regulation for managerial effectiveness: The
role of active feedback seeking. Academy of Management journal, 34(2), 251-
280.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
159

Baker, L. (n.d.). Metacognition. Retrieved August 31, 2016, from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/metacognition/
Baron, R. A. (1988). Negative effects of destructive criticism: impact on conflict, self-
efficacy, and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(2), 199.
Bassett‐Jones, N. (2005). The paradox of diversity management, creativity and
innovation. Creativity and innovation management, 14(2), 169-175.
Beinart, H., Cooper, M. J., & Palomo, M. (2010). Development and validation of the
Supervisory Relationship Questionnaire (SRQ) in UK trainee clinical
psychologists. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 49(2), 131-149.
Bickel, J., Dankoski, M. E., & Gusic, M. E. (2014). Discussing the undiscussable with
the powerful: Why and how faculty must learn to counteract organizational
silence.
Blackmon, K., & Bowen, F. (2003). Spirals of silence: The dynamic effects of diversity
on organizational voice. Journal of Management Studies, 40(6), 1393-1417.
Academic Medicine, 89(12), 1610-1613.
Buckingham, M., & Coffman, C. (2014). First, break all the rules: What the world's
greatest managers do differently. Simon and Schuster.
Budden, R. (May 8, 2014). How does your expat package stack up? Retrieved from:
http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20140507-expat-smarts-get-a-good-package
Catmull, E., & Wallace, A. (2014). Creativity, Inc: overcoming the unseen forces that
stand in the way of true inspiration. Random House.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the
right performance solutions. Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
160

Collie, R. J., Shapka, J. D., & Perry, N. E. (2012). School climate and social–emotional
learning: Predicting teacher stress, job satisfaction, and teaching efficacy. Journal
of educational psychology, 104(4), 1189.
Collins, J. C. (2001). Good to great. Harper Collins.
Conchie, B., & Rath, T. (2009). Strengths Based Leadership: Great leaders, teams and
why people follow. New York: Gallup, Inc.
DeNisi, A. & Kluger, A. N. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on
performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback
intervention theory.
Druckman, D., Singer, J., Van Cott, H., Singer, J., & Van Cott, H. (1997). Enhancing
Organizational Performance, Committee on Techniques for the Enhancement of
Human Performance, National Research Council.
DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2005). Professional Learning Communities at Work: Best
Practices for Enhancing Students Achievement. Solution Tree Press.
Eccles, J. (2009). Who am I and what am I going to do with my life? Personal and
collective identities as motivators of action. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 78-
89.
Eccles, J. S. & Wigfield, A., (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement
motivation. Contemporary educational psychology, 25(1), 68-81.
Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams.
Administrative science quarterly, 44(2), 350-383.
Ehtiyar, R., & Yanardağ, M. (2008). Organizational silence: A survey on employees
working in a chain hotel. Tourism and Hospitality Management, 14(1), 51-68.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
161

Evans, P., & Forth, P. (2015). Navigating a world of digital disruption. IEEE Engineering
Management Review, 43(3), 89-97.
Frey, B. S., & Osterloh, M. (2000). Motivation, knowledge transfer, and organizational
forms. Organization science, 11(5), 538-550.
Gilbert, P. (2014). The origins and nature of compassion focused therapy. British Journal
of Clinical Psychology, 53(1), 6-41.
Greenleaf, R. K. (1977). Servant Leadership.
Hansen, F., Hansen, R. B., & Smith, M. (2002). Rewards and recognition in employee
motivation. Compensation & Benefits Review, 34(5), 64-72.
Harvey, J. (1988). The Abilene Paradox: The Management of Agreement. Organizational
Dynamics, Summer, 17-43.
Herriot, P., & Pemberton, C. (1995). Competitive advantage through diversity:
Organizational learning from difference. Sage Publications, Inc.
Jan, T. (2017, February 24). Retrieved from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/
news/wonk/wp/2017/02/24/how-racial-bias-could-be-hurting-silicon-valleys-
bottom-line/?utm_term=.9e63148bc509
Jung, Lee Ann. (208) Scales of Progress. Educational Leadership. 75(5), 22-27.
Kasper, G. (1990). Linguistic politeness: Current research issues. Journal of Pragmatics,
14(2).
Keil, M., & Park, C. (2009). Organizational Silence and Whistle‐Blowing on IT Projects:
An Integrated Model. Decision Sciences, 40(4), 901-918.
Kim, M. Y. & Vich, M. (2016). Construction and Application of Radical Candor:
Efficiency of Criticism at Work. Central European Business Review, 5(4), 11-22.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
162

Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Training
Evaluation. Association for Talent Development.
Kline, S. J., & Rosenberg, N. (1986). An overview of innovation. The positive sum
strategy: Harnessing technology for economic growth, 14, 275.
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on
performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback
intervention theory.
Kotter, J. (1998, March/April). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard
Business Review, 1-8.
Kotter, J. (2011). Can You Handle an Exponential Rate of Change? Forbes blog,
http://www. forbes. com/sites/johnkotter/2011/07/19/can-youhandle-an-
exponential-rate-of-change
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into
practice, 41(4), 212-218.
Lencioni, P. M. (2010). Overcoming the five dysfunctions of a team: A field guide for
leaders, managers, and facilitators (Vol. 16). New York, NY: John Wiley &
Sons.
Lipton, L. & Wellman, B. (2011). Groups at Work: Strategies and Structures for
Professional Learning. MiraVia, LLC.
Latham, G. P., Locke, E. A., Saari, L. M., & Shaw, K. N. (1981). Goal setting and task
performance: 1969–1980. Psychological bulletin, 90(1), 125.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting & task performance.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
163

Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn &
Bacon.
Merrill, M. D. (2002). A pebble‐in‐the‐pond model for instructional design. Performance
improvement, 41(7), 41-46.
Millenson, M. L. (2003). The silence. Health Affairs, 22(2), 103-112.
Milliken, F. J. & Morrison, E. W. (2000). Organizational silence: A barrier to change and
development in a pluralistic world. Academy of Management review, 25(4), 706-
725.
Neff, K. (2003). The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion.
Self and Identity, 2, 223-250.
Oppel, R. A. (2002). Enron official says many knew about shaky company finances. New
York Times, 15, 2002.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of educational
research, 66(4), 543-578.
Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated
learning. International journal of educational research, 31(6), 459-470.
Pondy, L. R. (1967). Organizational conflict: Concepts and models. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 296-320.
Public Schools of North Carolina, State Board of Education, Retrieved March 15, 2018
from: https://www.google.com.sg/search?q=actfl+inverted+pyramid&safe
=active&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi45_Cr0u3ZAhUCY48
KHZ5xAyAQ_AUICigB&biw=960&bih=535#imgrc=kI_rvMOR3TNkkM
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
164

Silverman, M. (2004). Non-financial recognition: The most effective of rewards. Institute
for Employment Studies Research Network.
Scott, K. (2017). Radical candor: Be a kickass boss without losing your humanity. New
York, NY: Pan MacMillan Publishers.
Schein, E. H. (2004). Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
School 2016-17 Profile for Colleges. Retrieved April 30, 2017, from
https://www.sas.edu.sg/uploaded/documents/SAS_Profile_for_Universities.pdf
School 2016-17 Admissions Guide. (Retrieved April 30, 2017).
https://www.sas.edu.sg/uploaded/documents/Admission_Guide.pdf
Sharma, Y. (February 24, 2016). Business Drives Demand for International Schools.
BBC. Retrieved from: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-35533953
Walton, R. E. (1969). Interpersonal peacemaking: Confrontations and third-party
consultation (Vol. 1). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion.
Psychological Review, 92(4), 548.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
165

APPENDIX A: SURVEY INSTRUMENT
This survey is intended to help the school better understand the current culture around
radical candor. The survey results will be analyzed in order to make recommendations to the
school as to how to create an environment that allows deep levels of personal care and direct
challenge in order to meet goals. Your participation in this survey is voluntary. Should you
decide to participate, your honest response is very much appreciated. Your personal identity will
be kept confidential; your response on this form will in no way affect your position or the opinion
of you at the school. The completion of the survey should take about 15 minutes.

1. Which of the following types of feedback should a leader avoid?
a. feedback about a person’s personality traits
b. peer evaluation of teaching
c. data comparison of how one group is doing compared to another
d. all of the above

2. Which of the following types of feedback does a leader want to engage in?
a. goal related
b. in time, so that a person can do something about it
c. on-going
d. all of the above

3. Self compassion is
a. empathy
b. forgiving others so as to feel better oneself
c. understanding that everyone makes mistakes
d. allowing a lower standard for oneself

4. Compassion for others as demonstrated by leaders
a. is admitting one’s own mistakes
b. focuses on how to use the strengths rather than the weaknesses of team members
c. recognizes that everyone has shortcomings
d. all of the above

5. Which of the following best reflects the goal for organizational feedback (or radical candor)?
a. all teacher leaders will use radical candor 100% of the time
b. there is no organizational goal around radical candor
c. there is no clear goal around radical candor
d. I am not sure of the goal around radical candor

6. The best description of the culture of my team is (choose all that apply):
a. competitive- looking to see who or what is inferior or superior, more or less powerful,
harmful or benevolent
b. cooperative- looking to be of value to others, sharing, contributing, helping, appreciating
c. care-giving- provider of care, protection, safety, reassurance
d. care seeking- seeking input from others, protection, safety, reassurance
7. If I were to engage in direct feedback in my team, I am concerned that my team members
would react as follows (choose all that apply):
a. feel put down, abused
b. feel unappreciated, rejected
c. feel overwhelmed, unable to provide
d. become unavailable, withdrawn, threatening, exploitative

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
166

8. I am kind to myself.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

9. When I make a mistake, I tend to feel isolated.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

10. I see my failings as something that happens to everyone.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

11. Which quadrant represents radical candor?

12. Which quadrant represents ruinous empathy?

13. Which quadrant represents manipulative insincerity?

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
167

14. Which quadrant represents obnoxious aggression?

15. Which quadrant best characterizes your area of comfort?
a. radical candor
b. obnoxious aggression
c. manipulative insincerity
d. ruinous empathy

16. Which quadrant best characterizes your team?
a. radical candor
b. obnoxious aggression
c. manipulative insincerity
d. ruinous empathy.

17. I feel confident in my ability to provide radically candid feedback to members of my team.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

18. I feel confident in my ability to provide radically candid feedback to IAs or others who work
under me.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

19. I feel confident in my ability to provide radically candid feedback to Administration or others
who work “above” me.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

20. I feel confident in my ability to provide radically candid feedback to other teachers in the
leadership cohort.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

21. I feel confident that my team is able to give me radically candid feedback.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
168

22. I feel confident that my team has a culture of radical candor.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

23. I believe that the responsibility for providing feedback to members of my team is ultimately
with me.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

24. I believe it is my responsibility to provide feedback to Admin.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

25. When I am faced with the weaknesses of a team member, I know how to leverage his
strengths to the benefit of the team.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

26. My team feels the responsibility to provide feedback to each other.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

27. I value candid feedback among team members because it will help us achieve our team goals.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

28. I value compassion, and the ability to be open about mistakes and imperfections, because it
will help us achieve our team goals.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

29. I value a culture of radical candor because it will help my team achieve our common goal
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

30. I think a culture of radical candor will help the school achieve its 2020 goals.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

31. I know that SAS has a cultural goal of radical candor because (check all that apply)
a. I heard about it from admin informally
b. I heard about it from admin in formal settings
c. I see it in written communications from admin
d. I am not sure that there is a formal goal of radical candor

32. If I were to speak with my direct supervisor about a problem, I would expect the response to
be defensive.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

33. If I were to speak with my direct supervisor about a problem, I am quite sure that things
would change for the better.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

34. I feel that my direct supervisor knows how to best leverage my strengths to the benefit of the
school.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

35. My direct supervisor is open about his mistakes.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

36. My direct supervisor models radical candor.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

37. If I engage in radical candor with someone from Administration, I will most likely be
rewarded in some way.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
169

38. If I engage in radical candor with someone from Admin, I will most likely receive a thank
you note or a quiet acknowledgement of some type.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

39. If I engage in radical candor with someone from Admin, I will probably be given more
responsibility to problem solve.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

40. If I engage in radical candor with my team, my team will be recognized for the good work we
do.
Not true at all 1 2 3 4 5 Very true

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
170

APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this interview. Your
participation is very much appreciated. Your identity will be kept confidential. Nothing
you say here will in any way affect your standing at the school nor the opinion of
you. This interview will last about 45 minutes. I will ask you a variety of questions, and
will check back for understanding. Please feel free to clarify anything you said. In order
to ensure that I accurately represent your comments in the research, I would like to ask
your permission to record our conversation on my iPad. My iPad is locked and no one
but myself has access to it. I will not load the video anywhere, and once I have finished
taking notes from the interview, I will delete it so that it is not available to anyone. I will
be taking notes to ensure that I capture what you are saying.

• Describe your understanding of the culture of the leadership team at the school.
• Describe a radically candid interaction that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
• Are there other issues that you perceive to be important that you would not
discuss with Admin? What are they? Why would you not bring them up?
• Do you feel that people are rewarded for radical candor at ISE? Can you give me
an example of why you feel this way?
• How would you implement a culture of candor in the group you lead?
• What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
• What are the areas of growth for your team around the idea of radical candor?
• How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect your team goal?
• How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect your team goal?
• How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect the school goals?

Once the interview is completed, I will thank the interviewee and then later
deliver a hand-written thank you note.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
171

APPENDIX C: FOCUS GROUP PROTOCOL
As part of the study around a culture of candor, I would like to ask you a couple
of questions individually and in group. At the end of the session, I will collect the
responses and analyze the patterns. Your participation is voluntary. Should you decide
to participate, your honest response is much appreciated, as the data will be used to better
understand the culture of the school around candor. Recommendations will be made as a
result of the interpretation of the data in order to know how to best support the school in
implementing a culture of radical candor.
Participants will be granted the opportunity to first think quietly and write down
individual thoughts on note cards. Then, they will be invited to work in groups of 5 and
put ideas on large sheets of paper. They will be presented with the following four
questions:

• When planning a meeting agenda, what do you do to ensure all voices are
heard in the meeting?
• When you need to bring new knowledge or concepts to the team, how do you
organize the meeting agenda? Why?
• How might you help colleagues understand ratings of self compassion?
• How would you lead out a meeting to facilitate the concept of radical candor?

At the end of the session, the participants will be thanked for their participation.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
172

APPENDIX D: MEETING AGENDA

Scaffolding for note taking during the workshop on radical candor.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
173

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
174

APPENDIX E: FOCUS GROUP EVIDENCE
How to ensure all voices are
heard in meetings.
How to present a new
concept in meetings
How leaders can model
radical candor.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
175

How to present the
difference between harmful
and helpful feedback.
How to create awareness of
self compassion
How to share the concept of
radical candor and why it
matters.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
176

APPENDIX F: INTERVIEW NOTES
Interviewee #1
Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this interview. Your
participation is very much appreciated. Your identity will be kept confidential. Nothing
you say here will in any way affect your standing at the school nor the opinion of you. This
interview will last about 45 minutes. I will ask you a variety of questions, and will check
back for understanding. Please feel free to clarify anything you said. In order to ensure
that I accurately represent your comments in the research, I would like to ask your
permission to record our conversation on my iPad. My iPad is locked and no one but
myself has access to it. I will not load the video anywhere, and once I have finished taking
notes from the interview, I will delete it so that it is not available to anyone. I will be taking
notes to ensure that I capture what you are saying.

Describe your understanding of the culture of the leadership team at the school in regard to
radical candor.
[Leadership] has changed in my time here at the school. It started out as feeling like a team. I
don’t believe this was a result of being new to the school [x number of] years ago. I felt like I
was part of a K-12 team. It felt like a family…. The Superintendent who hired me, I felt that
way. The next Superintendent, I also felt that way. However, there was a change of leadership in
my division. With that leadership shift, it felt like a break in the team and [District Office]. As a
teacher, if we were to have conversations with [District Office], we are blacklisted. With that
person moving on, things began to brighten up. That fear takes a long time to dissipate. Once
trust is broken, it takes a while. I’m on my fourth principal in [x number of] years. I feel like
there is a break… between me and the Admin… as a teacher leader, I am not permitted to
question or give feedback…
For teachers and teacher leaders in [my division]… Our deputies have been extraordinary
leaders, encouragers, have had our backs as teachers and teacher leaders.
The current District Office team - some are approachable, who just get it…. I feel
comfortable talking to District Office about issues, I have been encouraged to have voice and
perspective. However, I keep being stopped by the principal.
From my perspective, the Superintendent isn’t aware of what’s going on with the
principal, but I don’t think that he sees these types of things as being a problem. He has
empowered [the principal], but there doesn’t seem to be communication between the
superintendent and the principal. The feedback that I am getting from the superintendent has not
been the same as from my principal.
For example, I was asked to be on a [special] team [to move the school toward 2020
goals]. I was approached by [a Superintendent], but I [was not really invited or made to feel
welcome by my Principal…] There were a lot of mixed messages…. I had no voice
whatsoever…
I feel that District Office knows me better than my own principal.
Describe a radically candid interaction that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
I had a very candid conversation with a dep principal. Lots of candid conversations with
dep principals, and they have been very supportive. [One for example in which the deputy said,]
I’ll take this one to [the principal] for you. Consider it approved.

I have had to be candid with my principal and say that I’m doing someone else’s job. I
was quite candid when I took the job description. I was able to be candid. He didn’t like it.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
177

[The Superintentendent] was very supportive. [The Superintendent] has had follow through.
Quick. I have not shared [my recent difficulty]…. My plan is to go to [the Superintendent]
directly…. My hands are tied…
Are there other issues that you perceive to be important that you would not discuss with
Admin? What are they? Why would you not bring them up?
The boy’s club…. I will not bring that up, because I think the boy’s club is school
wide. I don’t believe women are treated as equals. I think we like to talk the talk, but I don’t
think… I won’t bring it up.. Don’t want to be called a bitter bitch by a (male faculty
member). Because of that I do not feel comfortable… as women, it can be challenging….as a
leader, of an all male department...
Do you feel that people are rewarded for radical candor at ISE? Can you give me an
example of why you feel this way?
I absolutely feel that they are not. I believe it is punished. Faculty friends who have put
their neck out for others, and they are no longer here. Fired or chose to leave.
I had to advocate for a student to do an independent study because there was no course
that fit what she wanted to do. While it all worked in the end, I feel like my intent was
questioned…. We have students who have some very [special needs], and we have [some set
practices and traditions that are not healthy for them. I have provided options for them on my
own time, but needed admin approval.]
[My intent] was questioned, “Why can’t they go? Is this really in the best interest of
kids…” ...It’s finally solved that this is OK.
I can no longer have the conversations…. I’ve had the conversations that I’m at a point
that I can have them any more. I don’t feel confident….I don’t feel that it would make a
difference, I feel that I would be labelled… I’m just tired… I’ve been the voice for this group of
students for a really long time. I’ve let go of a lot of it. Because I spent the last two months going
home crying every day. I feel like I’m banging my head against a brick wall. I didn’t feel
respected or heard. People I respect were not being respected or heard. The people that I knew
were making poor decisions for other members were self serving were the voices being
heard. That was incredibly frustrating. I went home over the summer and thought of “She let
go”. It’s for my own sanity.
What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
Our discipline is pretty candid. It comes naturally with what we do. We’re always
pushing limits and boundaries, because there are no boundaries to what we do… We can have
those conversations…. It’s the very nature of what we do… [and we have extended that same
level of trust and respect to our instructional assistant as part of our team.]
What are the areas of growth for your team around the idea of radical candor?
We need to separate the personal from the professional. Trust and respect can have
somewhat of a rub. Making sure that we don’t take things personally that are professional. We
have candid conversations around the work we are doing. We need for people to know, “Your
idea wasn’t necessarily used, but you as a person are respected…”
How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect your team goal?
We’re very efficient with our PLC time. Our goal had to change, as a result of some of
the decisions made by the principal. Rather than spending our hour PLC time, we had to pull
back our goal [due to specific Admin class and hiring decisions that affected our team]… Our
goal was incredibly lofty, but that’s our PLC… All the members of our PLC have been really
flexible and wanting the best for everyone and for kids. Our goal was affected [lowered, in order
to compensate for Admin decisions].
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect your team goal?
This is my fourth principal. I tell him, “You have to trust me… Having this situation is
not going to be in the best interest of kids…” It is affecting different departments in different
ways… The loudest voices are the ones who are not tired any more…. Self serving voices are the
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
178

loudest voices. They are part of the boy’s club…. [with the same likes and habits]… If you don’t
fit into that … and male… if you don’t fit into that, then you can try to schedule a meeting with
the principal, but you may not get one.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect the school goals?
It goes back to the culture of fear. How can I support the big goal, if I don’t feel like my
voice was a part of it? I don’t always have to agree… [Certain things] had to happen. I get
that. It was hard work and they took a long time. I trust that. However, there are other items
where I know not all voices were heard.
Additional comments
Insecurity of Principals...I don’t think he gets “me”... I really think there is something
with him… He’s never worked outside of [his cultural context], so he doesn’t have this
perspective.

Principals are insecure about the relationship with [District Office]. I think they have
been given power to make decisions, but they are not necessarily backed by [District Office]. I
don’t think [District Office] is guiding principals- that there is a vision that [District Office] is
guiding in a clear cut way. I don’t think [District Office] and principals are talking. So, if you’re
making decisions, like [“x” program], for example, which is a Wild West show in [my division],
the Principal says “I don’t have the bandwidth for…” He can’t deal with the issues in my
department. I don’t think he’s getting guidance from [District Office], I think he’s expected to
solve problems, with no guidance.
My heart is tired. My soul is tired, and that’s no good for kids. I’m going to keep my
energy on my kids. My bandwidth is going to the kids. Kids are easy. The adults stink. It’s
taken me years to build relationships… [I have a lot of recognition from the parent community
and my work and name is recognized in many schools across the world because of the calibre of
my students’ work.]

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
179

Interviewee #2

Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this interview. Your
participation is very much appreciated. Your identity will be kept confidential. Nothing
you say here will in any way affect your standing at the school nor the opinion of you. This
interview will last about 45 minutes. I will ask you a variety of questions, and will check
back for understanding. Please feel free to clarify anything you said. In order to ensure
that I accurately represent your comments in the research, I would like to ask your
permission to record our conversation on my iPad. My iPad is locked and no one but
myself has access to it. I will not load the video anywhere, and once I have finished taking
notes from the interview, I will delete it so that it is not available to anyone. I will be taking
notes to ensure that I capture what you are saying.

Describe your understanding of the culture of the leadership team at the school.
Can you define the leadership team?
On the senior level, I am not in on those conversations. What I perceive between mid
(teacher) and senior level (principals). I perceive candor on the senior level. I perceive candor
from the senior to the middle level of leadership in modelling. Amongst the middle
level, because of the nature of intentional design and decision making, there has been an
intention to develop collaborative culture that is trust building… Who your team one is. Middle
level leaders (teacher leaders) are in a unique place between… there has been intentional
training… that has been more of my recent learning.

My exposure [to District Office] is limited to the leadership cohort or task force
committees. By the ways things are modelled… transparency… I really appreciate the
leadership cohort. Knowing that not everything works out… Willingness to show vulnerability is
being modelled in my own division. Reflecting a culture of vulnerability. Acknowledging we’re
all in it together. I’ve seen this in both [District Office] and principals.
I don’t know what a culture is among teacher leaders.
Describe a radically candid interaction that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
The radical candor at my level has been about goals and seeking possibilities for me and
asking for and receiving support for my own goals. I found that both in the leadership cohort at
the most senior level and with the principals. It has not been difficult, but rather an open and
honest conversation…. Due to the leadership cohort.
Any need to advocate for a student…?
Pause.
I have found that it has not been as much advocating for students, as it has been to do
with working with colleagues. [One of the conversations has been the percentage of] learning
support students [in certain classes]. The ratio of students with a great variety of learning needs,
have been in [particular classes]… It has been seeking out ways to reduce that number, by
reducing numbers or size of sections. That hasn’t yet changed. The conversation gets a bit more
emotional. We have honest conversations. No one holds back with that regard.

Are there other issues that you perceive to be important that you would not discuss with
Admin? What are they? Why would you not bring them up?
I think if it’s always been important, I don’t know that I’d ever held back. If it’s been
important, I don’t think I’ve ever held back. I feel that I can walk in anyone’s door and have an
honest conversation.
Do you feel that people are rewarded for radical candor at ISE? Can you give me an
example of why you feel this way?
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
180

I think the fact that at this stage, I don’t know that there isn’t a venue where issues can be
taken… If I feel comfortable to walk into a principal’s office.. Faculty Senate… There is
nothing that I see shut down…. I even look at parent and student forums….
How would you implement a culture of candor in the group you lead?
It’s something we already do. The key, though, is the idea of de-personalizing the
issue. Hard on the issue, soft on the person. Focus on the kids and the learning. As a leader, it’s
important to deal with. What’s the issue at hand, rather than the person? This is a norm.
What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
Focus on the learning and the kids, and the work we do together. The more we realize
the importance of our collaboration …. Why we are doing what we are doing. I don’t know that
everyone realizes the importance of the norms. We keep each other to task on that… That’s my
experience.
What are the areas of growth for your team around the idea of radical candor?
I’m going to shift to department, it’s just having opportunities… What I know from my
PLC, we don’t have fully developed on the scale of larger team.
How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect your team goal?
I always think of PLC. For me, everything has been supportive and positive. One thing I
appreciate is to continue to invite and acknowledge different ways of looking at the work…
We’re always trying to do the best. One way isn’t always the only way. To allow the time to let
all the voices… the more we have [radical candor], the broader perspectives, then usually what
comes out is a better outcome.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect your team goal?
Everything is all supported in the right/ best way. For example, with the principal, we
have regular check-ins so that there is the opportunity to debrief with areas in which you need
support. That is a good way to bridge support and to help the principal team know how to
support you… I like the check-ins. I’ve never cancelled or shortened it. It keeps the
communication going.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect the school goals?
From my experience in task work across the school, the conversations are productive. I
find there are a lot of good aspects of the culture that have been nurtured and developed that have
been helpful.
Examples?
For example, last year, when we were looking at change management. What are the
things that get in the way? Move us forward? The groups were mixed groups. Eventually we
fed out. I think at a school level, I think it useful to keep an ear to the ground on what is working
at the school.

There has been a great deal of support to cross divisional work, it has been supported and
encouraged.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
181

Interviewee #3

Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this interview. Your
participation is very much appreciated. Your identity will be kept confidential. Nothing
you say here will in any way affect your standing at the school nor the opinion of you. This
interview will last about 45 minutes. I will ask you a variety of questions, and will check
back for understanding. Please feel free to clarify anything you said. In order to ensure
that I accurately represent your comments in the research, I would like to ask your
permission to record our conversation on my iPad. My iPad is locked and no one but
myself has access to it. I will not load the video anywhere, and once I have finished taking
notes from the interview, I will delete it so that it is not available to anyone. I will be taking
notes to ensure that I capture what you are saying.

Describe your understanding of the culture of the leadership team at the school.
When I think about [District Office], I think about them as collegial. To me, they seem to
get along. They seem to be on the same page. From my perspective, it looks like people are
working together toward a common goal. It seems to be clarity and they seem unified. I enjoy
working with [District Office]…
When I’m with my own admin, I feel different. They seem stressed or overwhelmed. They
seem to constantly be putting fires out. They don’t come across as having a handle on
things. People tend to talk them about them negatively much more. To me, there is a difference
between [District Office] and divisional admin.

Describe a radically candid interaction that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
I haven’t had many of those interactions like that here. I feel more at ease … I don’t feel
like I have to say anything difficult…. If I have to go to the Assistant Superintendent, if I said,
“Oh, what was that about?” I get a nice dialogue/ get clarity.
In my own divisional admin, I’ve had a few interactions with radical candor, and I have
felt very stressed and shy. I don’t feel that I present myself or my ideas well, because I… I seem
to have a different opinion than most of my colleagues… [My ideas were] too different, and then
people didn’t want me to be part of the team. So then I didn’t feel safe or comfortable talking
with colleagues or admin.
I became uncomfortable… My different opinion or perspective wasn’t valued, it was seen
as something that needed to be changed or was causing problems, but when I’d bring it to
[District Office], an interesting conversation would ensue, while within the division I needed the
[accepted institutional] view.
Are there other issues that you perceive to be important that you would not discuss with
Admin? What are they? Why would you not bring them up?
My struggle was finding my place in my team and my PLC. I knew who I was at my old
school, and I tried to be that same person here, but I didn’t find that it fit here. I’m trying to learn
the personalities of the people on my team. How can I get help to get along with colleagues?

Do you feel that people are rewarded for radical candor at ISE? Can you give me an
example of why you feel this way?
I think some people are, but other people are vilified. I’ve seen certain individuals [like
“x”], and her opinion is valued and taken into consideration. Conversations then happen, whether
or not change does. I find there are other teachers, myself included, if they bring up a differing
opinion, they are labelled as difficult or not adapting to SAS. My opinion was never valued.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
182

At one point [in a meeting, ]I said, “I don’t think we agree on the purpose yet…” [but
the meeting just chugged along.] Suddenly a male colleague said, “I just don’t see that we can
move on until we know the purpose.” The admin confirmed him, while having ignored me. It
was the shittiest professional experience I’ve ever had. I didn’t have a good relationship with
either of them, and so I didn’t see a way forward, so I let it go.
I think in [District Office] there is equality of the genders. I think the Superintendent
tends to bring women into leadership. I see that still in [my division], I don’t really see it as a
problem until that experience, and then I thought, “Oh, shit, what’s this?” I’ve never come across
that anywhere. Sometimes, I think it’s a numbers thing. There are just so many people here. It is
so stark to me the difference between [District Office] and the reality of the day to day.
How would you implement a culture of candor in the group you lead?
It takes a lot of little things to build a culture where it’s OK, before you can ever get to
notions of candor. You have to have trust. What are the things you are going to do at every
meeting? Calling things out…. The other side of that is the professionalism. You don’t talk
about people behind their back, or go talk to admin to figure things out. You have to be clear that
we are two professionals trying to figure something out… I feel that here that there is significant
consequence. If you want to discuss difficulties, then people will talk very freely about you as
being a difficult person. In my previous school, we had a strong sense of trust and
professionalism. My principal addressed the problem. She created a safe environment. You
could say things to people without repercussions…. It was a much more stimulating work
environment.
What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
There’s not.
What are the areas of growth for your team around the idea of radical candor?
To build trust and professionalism. A code of ethics, treating each other as
professionals, listening, and having a dialogue, not answering and telling you why you’re right or
wrong.
How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect your team goal?
Our team goal is really interesting. We all like it, but it was one person’s opinion. That
person pushed and pushed it. The rest of us don’t offer contrary opinions. This one person came
up with the goal, two others liked it, and no one else spoke up.
The idea of the goal is a good idea, but it’s not really a SMART goal. There is
investment.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect your team goal?
Neither my team nor my division has a culture of candor. I don’t have a measurable
goal. At the end of the year, we can say that this is what we did, but I don’t think we can say how
students grew in relation to the goal.

I couldn’t believe the [team SMART] goal made it past admin.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect the school goals?
That’s my thing with this school. There seems to be such a big disconnect. There is such
a huge disconnect between what I hear in [District Office], and what I see in [my division]. [The
Superintendent’s] message at the beginning of the year was one thing…. Yet day in and day out,
it was “the opposite”. People would not include me in the conversation. When I would offer
something at PLC…. I was completely discredited. I would like to work at the school that
[Superintendent and the Assistant Superintendent] work at, ‘cause that sounds like a good one.
It makes me sound like a really unhappy, bitter person. I’m not sure I have a place
here…

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
183

Interviewee #4
Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this interview. Your
participation is very much appreciated. Your identity will be kept confidential. Nothing
you say here will in any way affect your standing at the school nor the opinion of you. This
interview will last about 45 minutes. I will ask you a variety of questions, and will check
back for understanding. Please feel free to clarify anything you said. In order to ensure
that I accurately represent your comments in the research, I would like to ask your
permission to record our conversation on my iPad. My iPad is locked and no one but
myself has access to it. I will not load the video anywhere, and once I have finished taking
notes from the interview, I will delete it so that it is not available to anyone. I will be taking
notes to ensure that I capture what you are saying.

Describe your understanding of the culture of the leadership team at the school.
To be honest, I don’t really know a lot about the high level at the school because I don’t interact
with them. I feel that the principals … are quite straightforward. They help clarify the process…
that it will be taken care of. That’s how I feel about my principal and department head. They’re
handy. I think it has something to do with my personality. If I feel something, I speak up. We
go straight to the point and fix the problem. It’s very efficient.

Describe a radically candid interaction that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
I went through the process of applying for a new position. From the beginning, I was
highly considered. [Then a political situation with a parent occurred which she wanted handled
differently.] She told me this was the reason I was not accepted. That was one thing that didn’t
make me feel comfortable was that communication. You should have communicated me ahead
of time, but not stop me from getting what I wanted.
I told my department head that I did not feel comfortable with that, that I wanted [the
opportunity] to prove that I can handle this [type of problem]. Now I’m over that. I do not hold
it against others.. There is always something that I can grow. I wanted my principal to tell me
straight up.
Are there other issues that you perceive to be important that you would not discuss with
Admin? What are they? Why would you not bring them up?
I haven’t thought of any.
[We need more classes and teachers. Admin doesn’t understand the complication of what
we are doing.] They think all [classes] are the same. That is something that we just stop
bothering ourselves about. We just deal with whatever we get. I believe some students will not
get more specific / individualized support from the teacher. It also depends on the teacher’s
work, that we have to do more interventions. It would be ideal to have more teachers….

Do you feel that people are rewarded for radical candor at ISE? Can you give me an
example of why you feel this way?
…. I think there is race issue here. It is our culture not to brag, not to speak too much
about we have done. We may encourage that you have done a good job, but we won’t tell others
what we have done. We’d rather do more work. Maybe next time, we should start to tell people
what we have done so that they can recognize us. I feel that in SAS, I don’t feel that a lot of
western teachers are willing to get to know us personally.
I feel in the school there is always certain people’s voice that is always heard, and others
always just give up and are not heard. Even in the leadership meetings, it is always the same
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
184

teachers, their names are called. I have attended meetings, I have eye contact with someone from
Central Admin, and in a small room in the library, she knows I am in the cohort, and she never
even bothered to reach out to know who I am. I think it’s a leader’s position to do so, to get to
know the employees of the school. While during the cohort meetings, the same people are always
asked for their opinions.
I believe if you talk to any teacher who is not white in SAS, I think they will share a
similar story.
How would you implement a culture of candor in the group you lead?
I think I would start by letting people know who I am and different communication
styles, I would let people know that I am straightforward. Even though in the relationship, I
cannot wait until the next day, I must fix the problem before I go to bed. I am comfortable to
share my thoughts and ideas. I will make sure that people have different access to me as a
leader… Some may feel free to talk in group, while others will need privacy. I need to know
people’s personalities well, their concerns...
What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
My team has overcome some challenges. In the 1st and 2nd years, there was not a very
good atmosphere. People would not share what they thought. They thought someone was doing
something under the table. At the end of the 1st year, the leader was trying to modify who taught
which levels…. At that time if I were to keep teaching, the dept. Head was trying to swap it
out… Both of us would end up teaching two [different preps]. But those teachers were not
happy, but they didn’t want to do it, but their claim was [that the Director] was playing
biased. We never did it before, why should we do it now… To let teachers know why. The
teachers didn’t believe she was being open and fair, they believed there was something under the
table. I kept on teaching 3 [different preps]. I was OK with that. [I told the director that] I can
teach one more [prep]l, but I don’t want people to think there is something under the table. But
that teacher held this against the whole team until the end of last year. Lesson planning, she was
passive aggressive… never any constructive suggestions from her side… Until the end of the
year, there was a very fierce conflict. The team leader and the teacher had a fight, it was
suggested that it would be helpful if everyone would put their work in the shared folder. The
Principal was involved, the [Director] was involved, leader of plc norms was reassured,
reinforced, to make sure that nothing is under the table. She poured out everything she has
collected for the last two years. Starting from the beginning of this year, she has started sharing
and… we are feeling safe and secure…
I think that teacher finally realized that she can no longer be passive aggressive… no
competition between us. No point holding against the whole team. Two new team members
changed the vibe… I wonder if there was a private conversation with the teacher. It was clear
that she was fighting and accusing was not fair. She was not sharing or contributing.
What are the areas of growth for your team around the idea of radical candor?
That we should not take it personally when you hear a different idea. To clarify the
borderline between a personal attack, and I just don’t like your idea. I don’t like your idea does
not mean that I think you are dumb. We are more cautious… about the wording. I like your idea,
but I don’t think it is the best one for the students. Instead of just saying, “I don’t think this is
good enough…” Focus on the fact...
How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect your team goal?
I think we are on the right path. We all share the same needs and challenges. We all want
to do this. We seek help as a whole team.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect your team goal?
I don’t think it’s affecting a lot. I think our dept has done a lot to ensure we can reach the
goal. Budget. There have been challenges. We’ve been supported. Our needs were clear and
we have a plan.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect the school goals?
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
185

To see everyone equally, no matter what race you are, where you are from, you hired us,
you approved our abilities to be a teacher here at SAS. So please make sure you know each
teacher. General recognition of a teacher. Our Central Admin team doesn’t know our
names. That is a very big sign. And visit our classes. At least get to know what we are doing.
For me it’s a sign, that they are welcoming us, this gesture of reaching out, telling us that “Hey,
I’m ready here, you can come to me.” But if they are not even willing to know my name, what
division do you teach? You smiled at me, you saw me, you didn’t even come to me? I will not
come to you then when I have feedback to give or thoughts to share.
Those little gestures. I don’t think it needs to be a big change. Just a change of the
mindset and gesture.
Any minority at SAS. It’s just they are dark skinned.
We rarely go to happy hour, because it’s not culturally appropriate… MS principal did
hear us and make a change to recognize cultural competence…

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
186

Interviewee #5
Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this interview. Your
participation is very much appreciated. Your identity will be kept confidential. Nothing
you say here will in any way affect your standing at the school nor the opinion of you. This
interview will last about 45 minutes. I will ask you a variety of questions, and will check
back for understanding. Please feel free to clarify anything you said. In order to ensure
that I accurately represent your comments in the research, I would like to ask your
permission to record our conversation on my iPad. My iPad is locked and no one but
myself has access to it. I will not load the video anywhere, and once I have finished taking
notes from the interview, I will delete it so that it is not available to anyone. I will be taking
notes to ensure that I capture what you are saying.
Describe your understanding of the culture of the leadership team at the school.
Principals and [District Office]:
What I’ve noticed that each school has a separate culture, and [District Office] is also
different. The interactions I have are quite different.
I feel that my relationships in [one division]… I can have conversations without fear of
retribution. We have regular meetings. With [another division], I also have regular
meetings. There, I think there is less conversation about big topics. More restricted. The
principals handle ideas themselves. It is not welcome to talk about big ideas or topics. [In the
third division]…. I don’t see the leadership. I have had interactions with two of them. Quite
friendly. Nice things to say. The other - we were working on an event and there was a parent
issues. At first, I was trying to change something, because I knew it was going to go badly….
Then it did go badly…. Then they listened for next time. The other time I had some conflict when
I was trying to change something. There was a surprising resistance to change. I had a little bit
of push back from [another division], as well. Periodically, there is resistance to change.
In the [District Office] it breaks down differently into departments. When I try to talk to
[one department], I don’t get responses. [The support staff system under them] is very
responsive. [whereas from this department of District Office], I rarely get a response. I’m left
hanging. With the [Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent], they’ve been very good about
listening and giving advice. The [Superintendent] was interested in having conversations about
how things are going. He seems proactive and supportive.
Then there are the HR meetings- related to contract. With the previous HR, I didn’t get
resolution. The answers are still party line and are not actually resolving the problem. The new
person has been a bit more flexible. Finance has been helpful. Facilities are really supportive of
what we need and do, they support what we do and back it up with money. It’s been a really nice,
straightforward process.
Generally, I feel that I am treated as a professional. The District Office has been the most
approachable.
Describe a radically candid interaction that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
I have some changes that I’ve been wanting to do. I need to do a schedule.
It’s not been about kids. It’s about position. When I talk to Admin, I get something like,
“OK, you’re telling me the problem, do you have a solution?” Is the response I tend to get. It
puts the ball in my court. Sometimes, I think if you’re looking for a way out and need help, then
you don’t get it.
I’m worried about my position… there are hierarchy and budget questions around my position.
Are there other issues that you perceive to be important that you would not discuss with
Admin? What are they? Why would you not bring them up?
Inter-collegial issues that have come up…. If you bring it to admin, then it appears that
your tattling on someone. I think it needs to go to the person. I do feel like there is a hierarchy
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
187

structure problem. I work for [one] principal, yet I don’t have authority to tell [another] principal
“no”... There are conflicts or differing opinions around scheduling and resources.
I can’t tell people “no” you can’t do that. I feel like the issue is not between me and Admin, but
between me and colleagues. I feel like this is part of the culture of the position.
There is a long history about how [the people in my department] are working and
operating… and there is the assumption that it will continue. It’s really hard to change. If I find a
change that everyone wants… It’s usually, OK… If there is a change that may be good, but
people aren’t used to it, then there is a lot of resistance.
I don’t think I get a life. The schedule just assumes that you just take it on. My
predecessor did 12 hours every day, and weekends. The team is used to working that way. How
can I give people a break? How can I be more humane? The team is used to working that way.
You look like you are being negative about things, because you’re trying to change
them. I was doing what I thought was an improvement. and stakeholders saw it as negativity.
Do you feel that people are rewarded for radical candor at ISE? Can you give me an
example of why you feel this way?
It feels like when I say something that is pertinent or to address an issue, it is not met well
generally. Admin will generally listen. With colleagues it is less. Why do you want to change
that? You’re just complicating things. I see a large resistance to change.
Some people see my way of addressing problems as negative, others perceive it as being
a straight shooter. Here I’ve had to learn to be more political and hold things back. It’s odd,
because you think people think you are professional, and put fresh eyes on things. Some are
willing to change, but I have to do it really slowly. I give the idea and then I give them time to do
it. I found this has been more helpful.
How would you implement a culture of candor in the group you lead?
More one on one conversations with people to bring up important topics- to start having
the one-on-one conversations. The problem I have is when to find the time. It’s hard to get (in
touch) with people. There’s not a good place (area to go to) for a private conversation.
What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
People want to hear directly what is going on, yet they are the same people who when I
talk to them directly, they tend to reject the idea. We had a meeting at the beginning of the year,
it was helpful. One person tends to lead the conversation- which is why I think one-on-one’s will
be better. We do it well in text. Sometimes if we have an idea, it bounces in text or e-mail.
What are the areas of growth for your team around the idea of radical candor?
Answered above
How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect your team goal?
Answered above
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect your team goal?
I think staff is afraid to talk to admin, or they think that what they say won’t be
heard. This is what I hear from teachers. When we talk about 2020 goals, “Yeah, we’ve been
talking about this for years, and it’s never going to happen. We don’t see it coming.”
In any small way I can, I’m trying to get those things moving. The plan has been delayed
and cut off from 2020, so certain groups… “we’ll figure out what we’re going to do… There are
some things that are still off… facility concerns that have [yet to be addressed].
I have been asking, “How do I get on a committee?” No one knows how or when!
I have gone through principals, through [specific people in the District Office], yet I don’t
know how to get on a committee. There are also some other pieces. Things that have been
pushed by admin that have hurt the program…. Admin decision in one division affects things
down the line...and teachers don’t feel that they have voice in the decision. They’ve tried to say
things, “What can we do to solve this?” they don’t get a lot of response.
Problems track from one school to another.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
188

Interviewee #6
Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this interview. Your
participation is very much appreciated. Your identity will be kept confidential. Nothing
you say here will in any way affect your standing at the school nor the opinion of you. This
interview will last about 45 minutes. I will ask you a variety of questions, and will check
back for understanding. Please feel free to clarify anything you said. In order to ensure
that I accurately represent your comments in the research, I would like to ask your
permission to record our conversation on my iPad. My iPad is locked and no one but
myself has access to it. I will not load the video anywhere, and once I have finished taking
notes from the interview, I will delete it so that it is not available to anyone. I will be taking
notes to ensure that I capture what you are saying.
Describe your understanding of the culture of the leadership team at the school in terms of
radical candor.
Can you please explain Radical Candor?
I draw the four quadrants and explain briefly.
The leadership team is … I guess I can see it on a few different tiers: The deputy
principal, the overall principal. Perhaps because of the size of the school, it feels that the
principal and the [District Office] is here (she shows the quadrant drawn of manipulative
insincerity). When they are present, they are mostly there on a caring role. Not particularly
giving any specific feedback. Just general feedback such as “Really good”. If it’s not someone
we work with consistently however, then that trust isn’t there, then it comes off as obnoxious
aggression. I don’t know if that’s a product of the size of the school. I don’t feel that District
Office or the principal is very visible. We don’t have a lot of contact time with them. I think that
our Deputy can be straight up, in a good way, but occasionally is a bit disconnected from the
work we are doing.
Sometimes there are issues, and being a PLC leader, issues with the Instructional
Assistants (IAs) or with certain teachers, we end up being the go-between people on our team and
the principals. I don’t feel that these issues are always dealt with. They say they will be dealt
with it, but the follow-through isn’t there. There seems to be a disconnect between the priorities
and needs of the team and the actions of the admin. Some things need to be dealt with a timely
manner, in order to avoid a disconnect.
Describe a radically candid interaction that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
Recently the admin is pushing for us to [implement a specific change at] a specific time,
so the admin assigns specific additional support teachers to our PLC to help during that
time. When asked how often they should be available to help, [there was ambiguity].
Being familiar with [the needs of the new change] I communicated [our needs] by
email... I have not heard back. So now, I have to go back tomorrow to find her to talk face to
face. If really we are doing this, then we need [more support].
Administration has used radical candor with us. One particular Director has been more
present than most. We focused on writing, [and made a particular suggestion]. The director
came to us and said “NO” we cannot [implement that change]… He felt that if that change was to
be made, it was to be made school wide. So we went back and said “Then why can’t we make it
schoolwide?” So we went to him, and said we would like this to be a priority… So now we are
allowed to [work with the new change]. I think that it was important that he could see that it
would make it must more useful for teachers and would give us better data on kids.
Are there other issues that you perceive to be important that you would not discuss with
Admin? What are they? Why would you not bring them up?
What’s hard is having a conversation with admin about a team member that is
struggling. I think you first need a conversation with that team member. When you’ve worked
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
189

with a team member and you feel it’s not a productive partnership, or not an effective teacher… I
think it’s a hard situation to navigate. You want to ensure that kids get the best experience. It
can be challenging to balance that in a way that’s not selling out the team member, but is also
making the right move for students.
Do you feel that people are rewarded for radical candor at ISE? Can you give me an
example of why you feel this way?
No, not necessarily. Maybe with certain people in certain contexts. But I’m thinking of
one person in the school in particular who has been speaking out. If you are consistently
questioning decisions for the best interest of students, I feel that Admin shuts down on that person
and doesn’t want to hear it. I have seen people who speak out with fully justified opinions whose
intent is around the kids, who are not invited to meetings and are shut down.
How would you implement a culture of candor in the group you lead?
This is challenging, as our group is strong in harmony. I don’t like conflict. As a leader,
I have taken note about that. As the leader, and knowing that it is a challenge for me, we have
been taking a lot of time to build a culture of care. We have monthly happy hours. We take the
first minutes of the meeting to catch up with people. We try to do things together like a common
Halloween costume... Trying to build that bond to promote the caring. And then I think we have
to create a space where we all recognize… That the top priority is the students. If we keep that in
mind, then it is not about a person’s ideas, then that removes the personal argument and puts in
the realm of a professional disagreement. As a PLC really thinking about reflecting on what
people are saying, as what they think is best for students, but doing it in a caring way.
What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
We want to create a team bond. We are constantly checking in with each other to see that
people are doing well. There is a mentality of assuming best intentions, which is a good way of
going into a meeting. We didn’t think that we had a lot of need for constructive conflict, as we
are pretty much aligned, but I think that we are developing a culture of accepting more differing
opinions. I don’t think we are as straight up as we could be, but overall, we’re very caring, and
we’re moving toward that constructive conflict that we know will be useful as a team.
How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect your team goal?
I think that our team is a huge group of learners, and we strive to do things well. We care
about each other, about the kids. I think that those are all great qualities, and all the time it takes
our perfectionist nature as a team has impeded us from moving as quickly toward goal as we
would have liked.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect your team goal?
Long pause.
Well.
Long pause.
I think one thing we’ve brought up items and requests, but have been denied… We
brought that up and stated our reasons, and they said no. Which maybe if there was more radical
candor and they really cared… I don’t know the purpose of the SMART goal [for this particular
Director in the District Office], but I think it’s about teacher learning in order to impact student
learning. That was not something [this person] was open to. I think you can make suggestions. I
think some people can be open and straight up. I think typically the admin will not always agree,
but not even give a strong reason back. We haven’t always engaged in that dialogue. We ask,
they say no, or we ask they say yes, but there is not that dialogue that makes things stronger.
Is the size of the school hindering that constructive talk? If it only impacted a few
classes, they might be more willing to say yes. Since this is such a big beast, maybe they feel they
have to stick to what they are doing to make things fair or equal.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect the school goals?
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
190

I feel as though the R&D work was before my time, it seemed that it was a nice
opportunity for a small group of people to learn about best practices, but it seemed that there was
not a space afterward for other faculty to give feedback, especially as to the vision of the school.
Personalized learning is still scary for a lot of people. People don’t know what that could
or should look like. Teachers feel overwhelmed with the changes. It’s a lot to digest. The
overall numbers of changes in terms of curriculum … It feels like another job for us to figure out
how they can come and support us…
A lot of people left in the last 4-5 years, and a lot of new people came, share the same
vision as the SAS 2020 vision. I came from a responsive classroom school. A lot of people came
from places where they were using inquiry, so they’re supporting that. I feel that the staff now, as
opposed to 2014-15 are inherently more on board with that vision.

Personalized learning- what’s scary?
From chatting with team members…. What is intimidating, is that students are all
investing in different things and at different stages of learning, the organizational aspect is
challenging. Time and space and covering the standards we need covered while at the same time
making personalized learning meaningful…
Resources.. Having strong supports for personalized inquiry/ learning. Knowing how to
support students with the resources when the pl might go in so many different directions.
For some people, there’s that fear that the foundational skills will be forgotten or not fine
tuned, early elementary is when those skills are built… spelling, handwriting, math facts… people
are worried that the basic foundational skills will fall by the wayside if they are not the main
focus.
Additional comments
I don’t think we can have radical candor with admin, without admin being visible and
working with us, and we see them as supports for us as well as leaders.
I do think that their idea of assigning one District Office person to each grade level is a
good idea in theory, but the person who was assigned to us only showed up once, and never came
again. In theory, I think it’s a great idea. I personally feel most comfortable talking to this
Director from the District Office than anyone, even my division principal. I don’t think we’re
having constructive conflict, it is more yes or no, but I’m able to bring up topics, whereas with
other admin it would be very hard to bring up new ideas or come to them with issues. I don’t
know them that well, I don’t want my only impression with people to be there stirring the pot.

If it really matters to them, then they need to show up. It's a great idea, if it was actually
carried out, it would make us feel much more comfortable to share our thoughts more openly and
honestly.
Desserts and drinks, the idea that for parents that he would have small 40-50 person
events. More opportunities like that with the Superintendent … I would suggest to host more
events more vents like that for staff and not just new incoming faculty… to chat.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
191

Interviewee #7
Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this interview. Your
participation is very much appreciated. Your identity will be kept confidential. Nothing
you say here will in any way affect your standing at the school nor the opinion of you. This
interview will last about 45 minutes. I will ask you a variety of questions, and will check
back for understanding. Please feel free to clarify anything you said. In order to ensure
that I accurately represent your comments in the research, I would like to ask your
permission to record our conversation on my iPad. My iPad is locked and no one but
myself has access to it. I will not load the video anywhere, and once I have finished taking
notes from the interview, I will delete it so that it is not available to anyone. I will be taking
notes to ensure that I capture what you are saying.
Describe your understanding of the culture of the leadership team at the school.
The [District Office], I would say is fairly insular. The divisional administration- they
kind of tend to as far as leadership decisions goes, they tend to keep that among
themselves. There’s not a lot of discussion as to how decisions are made. They are not very
transparent. The decisions are made within the group (principals/ deputies)
For [District Office], I would say it is similar, but it’s a larger group. I think chosen
people have access to bring information/ ideas in, but decisions are still made within that group.
In my work with those different groups... they don’t take a lot of input from teachers, and almost
zero from parents. They make a lot of decisions about what they think is best without consulting
parents at all, which in my division has caused quite a bit of friction between parents and
administration.
Describe a radically candid interaction that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
I feel more comfortable with Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent than I do with
my own admin. I feel like there is trust. I feel like if I go in there and tell [them] something, I feel
like there is trust.
If I walk into the office of my divisional principal, however, it’s downright not
welcome….
We were having issues with a teacher. I was in a position of leadership where I felt I
should have been involved. I had to dance around the issues. We definitely could not have the
conversation with the principal.
Are there other issues that you perceive to be important that you would not discuss with
Admin? What are they? Why would you not bring them up?
Personnel issues. The biggest issues I see are in Personnel, both in how certain people
are treated with lack of follow through with [the contractual evaluation process]. I see it being
abused in multiple divisions. Promises for follow through is being held to the letter in the
agreement, but not in the spirit. There is not permission to stand up and advocate for a
person. There is no ability to have those conversations. That would be the biggest area.
Initiatives/ Initiative fatigue… I feel that all admin is blind to this. With all the different
plans, 2020 plans, with immersion, NGSS, Quest, programs in the High School, standard based
grading, sports coverage, continued curricular writing, continued PLC work, and all of the myriad
of things… demands are placed not only on faculty members, but on other supporting teachers
and existing structures/ programs… How will this affect future jobs/ families?
Do you feel that people are rewarded for radical candor at ISE? Can you give me an
example of why you feel this way?
Radical Candor is only appreciated when it makes someone look good in front of parents
…. “Hey, you need to look out for this…” and it gives them a heads up ahead of time, or makes
them look progressive. When fixing it is going to make them look better in front of faculty or
parents.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
192

Go to [an administrator] about an initiative that is about to move forward, it is best to
frame it as “this will make you look good”, then you have a chance. Don’t frame it as “this is a
problem”. Frame it as, “If you do something, it will make you look good.” If I want anything
done, I’d have to walk in and say, “you could turn this into a win by showing that you are
supporting families” rather than saying, “Hey, the health coverage isn’t covering….” This is
what I use as a means to make things move.
Contracts are not being renewed. Admin is worried about the culture of fear. If I walk in
and say this isn’t fair, it’s not enough. Make it an issue for admin, and they have to know that it
will cause them problems or make them look bad, and then things can move.

How would you implement a culture of candor in the group you lead?
By being in the trenches, when something happens, I take the blame and I make sure it’s
public, yet I praise the group. I will fall on the sword when things don’t go right. Solicit
feedback and use it and improve on it. Don’t shut it down. Use it. People see it- and it builds
trust. People have to know that you’re there with them. Once you do that, and do that publicly,
you gain trust. The moment you place blame as the leader away from yourself, or become
defensive, then you lose that trust and it takes a really long time to build that back up.
Good leadership has been around for thousands of years-whether the battlefield or the
office, if a person feels that someone is going to steal the praise, they won’t take risks…. If
someone places blame…then they lose the team.
Leadership is service. I had good leaders in front of me. An old school principal
teacher. He wholeheartedly took blame if something happened. I had some good leaders in front
of me.
One thing I see is you get someone who has taught for 3 years- and then they go into
admin. There is often a short view of things. [I now have many years] of teaching… I only now
feel comfortable about walking into a colleagues’ classroom and talking about what they’re
doing… With my teacher partners… we have that level of trust…. As a chair, I’d do
observations. I would talk with people about their instructional practices. (I would never have
felt comfortable doing that after only 3 years of experience.) I feel that the principal should be a
successful instructor…(not an inexperienced teacher.)
What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
In my department and in my PLC, I think a lot of trust comes when they know that you
are in the battle with them and not to ladder climb. Ask for that kind of raw feedback, and be
willing to work on it and not be offended by it. Listening, and showing that you yourself can
receive feedback and learn and grow from it. It requires time and opportunity to see it happen in
action.
What are the areas of growth for your team around the idea of radical candor?
How to phrase it appropriately. How to have candor and phrase things
nicely. Particularly in certain subject matters where we are not so good with words. How to
phrase and ask for and receive the kind of feedback as well as to provide it in a manner that is
truthful, yet is not hurtful. Protocols, structures to provide these things in a safe manner…
whether it be coaching structures in instructional practices, “What I hear you say?” not “You
are.”
Depends on the women. It depends on the guy, as well. There’s the level of trust. No
one is trying to screw over any one else. Nothing gets rolled out of proportion. If people
question me or came to me with the same questions or concerns, I don’t know that I would
respond the same way. No one cares about glory. We just want to do our job. When people are
looking for credit or glory, that causes problems & mistrust.
How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect your team goal?
We have a fairly high level of trust, is really in the end about making instruction better
for kids, and we know it’s coming from a good place. We make adjustments based upon the
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
193

feedback. No personal feelings hurt. We work mostly with men. We are more direct. We
respond immediately and then it gets done. There is no resentment. I tell something to my
teacher partner that he doesn’t like, he tells me to F off, and then we hash it out and take care of
it then and there. I think that was the purpose of strengths finders…
Strengths Finders are not permanent characteristics, but change with mood…
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect your team goal?
It doesn’t because we are insulated from a lot of the other things that happen around
us. Because we are considered a high functioning PLC, we get left alone. People know we are
getting work done… We don’t get messed with. That’s very nice. It’s only when we go out
looking for trouble that it finds us. It’s only in my work outside of the classroom- the leadership
position- is the only place I have to have those conversations.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect the school goals?
What ends up happening is you don’t get good feedback. People are afraid to speak
up. They don’t feel comfortable with tough conversations. Leadership tend to get a rosier picture
about the movement toward the goal or the reason to do it than actually exists. If you can’t have
honest feedback, then you can’t have honest conversations, then you can’t have good data to
make good decisions. Then it builds resentment, lack of follow through, lack of commitment to
organizational goals.
Additional comments
“Very few people are willing to call the bull shit, and even fewer are willing to receive it.” The
people that I enjoy working with are the ones that don’t have ego. WOO tends to do well for
themselves. Teachers trust people who are working hard and are in the trenches with them. If
they sense you are a ladder climber, then they’ll shut you down. You’ve got one group that’s
woo-ing each other, then there’s another group that’s working hard. The Assistant
Superintendent is doing make-up for plays and is doing some Advisory. That goes a long way
with our faculty in gaining that trust, because they feel she’s in there with us.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
194

Interviewee #8
Thank you very much for taking the time to participate in this interview. Your
participation is very much appreciated. Your identity will be kept confidential. Nothing
you say here will in any way affect your standing at the school nor the opinion of you. This
interview will last about 45 minutes. I will ask you a variety of questions, and will check
back for understanding. Please feel free to clarify anything you said. In order to ensure
that I accurately represent your comments in the research, I would like to ask your
permission to record our conversation on my iPad. My iPad is locked and no one but
myself has access to it. I will not load the video anywhere, and once I have finished taking
notes from the interview, I will delete it so that it is not available to anyone. I will be taking
notes to ensure that I capture what you are saying.

Describe your understanding of the culture of the leadership team at the school.
To some degree, [in my position] we meet once a fortnight with Admin. There are a lot
of cross conversations at those meetings. Because of the structure of the [school], I am assigned
to a deputy. My working relationship with that deputy is quite strong, quite deep. We have
[several] deputies that work in the [school], one thing that is at times quite apparent… [be it ]
culture or protocols… there is a difference in administrators. I’m not sure there is a common
culture. There are some commonalities, [such as] core values [and]... moving into the future,
[with new changes]. We are looking forward to having a common language about how things are
done in the school. We need that commonality. We need to be able to show parents that things
are done with the same approach.

[There have been some big changes at the school.] There are a lot of structures and protocols in
place from the old system. There is a common message coming from [my department]… It has
gotten better…. Everyone is invested in “We’re here for students.”
I’m not sure every administrator has the same definition of “All students learn at high
levels.” I’m not sure all believe in that. I’m not sure the beliefs they have are common. They all
have different personalities.
What characterizes your interactions with the District Office?
The school is so large, they are that big, I don’t really have much to do with [District
Office]. The size of the school really does influence the way it operates. The only contact I’ve
had with them is … regarding SMART goals. “They say, that’s great, wonderful…” And then
they go. My own interaction with [District Office] is limited. If I took it right to the top,
sometimes the Superintendent knows who I am and sometimes he doesn’t.
Describe a radically candid interaction that you had or wanted to have with
Administration. What happened?
Yes, I have had a difficult conversation, with my deputy principal. It was about the
professional practices of another person at the school. It was a difficult conversation to have. I
don’t want to have anyone at the school have their job jeopardized. I felt the student was not
being serviced to their best needs. It comes down to personality. Other people are very good at
that. I don’t say what I think, I sit back and observe. I have a saying, “Know your lane, your
roles and responsibilities.” It’s not my place to say that. As much as I may see, I have to be very
mindful of the trust I have with teachers. I felt that things were being said about a child, that I
just felt weren’t right. That’s tough.
If we go to culture. It is not in my nature to be critical of others. The definition of [my
role] ...gets fuzzy. I don’t like crossing my lane, but there have been times that I have been
asked.
THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
195

Administrators interact differently with [people in my role]. There are times I have to
talk with Admin… Checking the boxes, you’re done. I don’t know however, whether that’s just
me, and I’m not inviting that conversation enough...

Are there other issues that you perceive to be important that you would not discuss with
Admin? What are they? Why would you not bring them up?
There was a part of [my role] was to be the eyes and ears of the administration. I have had a very
top administrator come and ask me a question about someone… I have told him to go and
observe himself. It’s a balancing act. I have to have the trust of teachers. But when that’s not
being done by the administration, when admin is not checking on what is happening in
classrooms, and that teachers are following contract, then it becomes difficult. I’m very cautious
of that. I have to have the support teachers…. It’s very tricky.

Do you feel that people are rewarded for radical candor at ISE? Can you give me an
example of why you feel this way?
We have teachers come from all over the world. It’s not how they’ve been brought up, because
it’s not modelled, or taught… There are people who are very direct, but they are not always
constructive. There are others who stay in their lane.
I have seen examples when Admin has been thankful to [people in my role] for bringing
these things up. There was a situation with a very complicated family structure. There were
some checks and balances that weren’t done in terms of our records. [A certain administrator]
can put his back up, but I have learned that once he has digested it, he says thank you. It never
was resolved, however. There are only 24 hours in a day.
You can’t go in and think you’re going to save each child each and every day, you will
burn out and you won't be good for anyone. I can see a situation that’s not very positive, where a
parent is not modelling or teaching responsibility for their child, but in the end of the day, I can
only suggest, I can’t enforce. It comes down to the own person and their own philosophy and
what they’ll do.
How would you implement a culture of candor in the group you lead?
I’d find that really hard. I have in my group, some people who [use a lot of candor]. I see
the results of that, and it upsets other people. Before you say something, you have to be sure
crossed all your T’s and dotted all your I’s. Before anyone goes to that piece of radical candor…
it is important to have done the homework. Sometimes what is seen on the surface is not what is
going on in the background…. [It is important to have an alternative] viewpoint and another
angle.
If we talk about radical candor, then we have to address cultural bias at this
school. There is more than one way to skin a cat. Before you go in with the candor, be sure that
it’s fair and accurate, and that’s hard. Sometimes you need to buy time… to stand back a little bit
before you jump in. I feel that we’re reactive, not proactive, nor do we wait.
What is radical candor? There is a time and a place to use it, but it can’t be something that you
use all the time. It’s got to be used cautiously and carefully, and in small doses… I see a lot of
people dish out radical candor, but they can’t take it. That bothers me immensely.
This is where I say that it gets very complex, because where we’re from influences our outlook on
life.
There is a fine line between judgement and radical candor. Nobody likes criticism, but we all
need it, and it needs to be constructive.
“Do you think you’re a perfectionist?” It really bothered me.
“Well, I want to do the best I can”, I responded.
“Yeah, but do you think it could be a flaw?”
If I have a very close colleague speak to me, then I listen up.

THE CANDOR TO LIVE IN ONGOING EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION
196

What are the areas of strength in your team around the idea of radical candor?
If a school wants to move forward with this, then the school needs to know what it will
look like, sound like at this school. Radical candor is coming from the corporate world. I know
the corporate world can be very brutal.
I explain the quadrants of radical candor again, this time more slowly.
People are often caring. On what level are they really caring? If the school is to use this,
it would be so easy to move to obnoxious aggression.
People are often critical of their children. I have to teach people to care… Give them
key social emotional competencies. Self management, self control, relations.. Adults don’t have
this “care” piece either. It’s a very weighted concept that requires a lot of skills to deliver with
finesse…. In the end of the day, you don’t want to hurt anyone. I can see this as being
misinterpreted.
Have you ever seen a situation with a lot of care and no honesty?
Sometimes. Sometimes with teachers toward students. Or counsellors toward parents or vice
versa.
The most skillful teachers are the ones who are the most brutally honest, but know how to show
their care.
Young children need to be explicitly told. Direct feedback is important and must be delivered
with care. I find it easier to use Radical Candor to implement with students than with adults. I
find it challenging with adults.
I find people who use radical candor for others, need to also be recipients of it. Otherwise there
is no trust. The base of this, before you even get to this, is trust. That is where I buy time. Some
people take this well, and others do not. There are different ways of learning RC.
What are the areas of growth for your team around the idea of radical candor?
This question was addressed above.
How does the culture of the team around radical candor affect your team goal?
This question was addressed above.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect your team goal?
This question was addressed above.
How does the culture of the school around radical candor affect the school goals?
This school wants to be so many things to so many people. There needs to be more clarity on the
vision. There are too many plates spinning. There is so much contradictory stuff happening at the
school. It depends on where you are and what is your philosophy.
Before for the school does this, it needs to be explicit on what our goal is. We need to
philosophically know where we stand on who we are and what is important to us. What is our
philosophy?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Radical candor presents a model in which high levels of direct challenge intersect with equally high levels of personal care (Scott, 2017), thus creating an organizational culture where feedback can help both the organization and individuals grow toward maximum potential. This study analyzed the knowledge, motivation and organizational behaviors (KMO) necessary to create a culture of radical candor at the International School for Expatriates (ISE). Radical candor is needed in order for ISE to achieve its organizational goal of creating personalized learning paths that enable all students to learn at a high level. ❧ This study focused on the disparate components of radical candor within the teacher leaders of the organization. The findings revealed a strong sense of motivation for radical candor within ISE. However, two areas of motivation were validated as gaps: personal responsibility and personal confidence. All aspects of knowledge and organizational behaviors were also validated as gaps. The recommendations for practice were to provide data access to teacher leaders that would enable teams to measure progress toward the larger organizational goal, to remove organizational barriers to radical candor at the administrative level, and to create professional development opportunities. ❧ This study was limited to the study of one organization. Despite this limitation it is the hope of this researcher that iterative and purposeful planning around a culture of radical candor will one day provide a roadmap for educational culture that enables an iterative, purposeful, open and caring discussion in the face of the ongoing struggle of educational innovation.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The moderating role of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on employee turnover: A gap analysis

PDF

Examining teachers' roles in English learners achievement in language arts: a gap analysis

PDF

Considerations for personalized professional learning at International Academy of South East Asia: a gap analysis

PDF

Examining the adoption of electronic health records system in patient care and students’ education using the GAP analysis approach

PDF

Building teacher competency to work with middle school long-term English language learners: an improvement model

PDF

The role of international school teacher leaders in building leadership capacity within their teams

PDF

Cultivating culturally competent educators

PDF

Perception of alternative education teachers readiness to instruct English language learners: an evaluation study

PDF

Building leaders: the role of core faculty in student leadership development in an undergraduate business school

PDF

Winning the organizational leadership game through engagement: a gap analysis

PDF

Creating the conditions for change readiness in higher education: an innovation study

PDF

Employee retention and the success of a for-profit cosmetics company: a gap analysis

PDF

Establishing a systematic evaluation of positive behavioral interventions and supports to improve implementation and accountability approaches using a gap analysis framework

PDF

Raising women leaders of Christian higher education: an innovation study

PDF

Making a case for teaching religious literacy in Ethiopian schools: an innovation study

PDF

Competency in a blended workforce: an evaluation study of contracted labor development challenges

PDF

The African American male achievement gap: teachers as change agents

PDF

Understanding the high school parent involvement gap in the era of local control and accountability

PDF

Response to the growth of charter schools in California school districts: an evaluation study

PDF

Implementing effective leadership development initiatives at the unit level in the Air Force: an innovation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Ewell, Cristina Loran (author)

Core Title The candor to live in ongoing educational innovation

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 08/09/2018

Defense Date 04/20/2018

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag compassion,feedback,gap analysis,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational culture,radical candor

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Sundt, Melora (committee chair), Chung, Ruth (committee member), Picus, Lawrence (committee member)

Creator Email cewell@usc.edu,Cris.Ewell@saschina.org

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-68474

Unique identifier UC11672299

Identifier etd-EwellCrist-6714.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-68474 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-EwellCrist-6714.pdf

Dmrecord 68474

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Ewell, Cristina Loran

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA