Golden Mean or distinctly average?

David Carne, school business professional and executive coach, on the concept of the Golden Mean

With all the focus on resource efficiency in schools, it would be entirely forgivable for an outsider observer to assume that the school system is working towards achieving average levels of expenditure for everything, while simultaneously hoping to achieve well above average performance. I am long enough in the tooth to have witnessed an education minister stating that their aim was to ensure all pupils achieved above average results – a great aspiration, but sadly a mathematical impossibility.

I am also not the first to observe that being an average school is not an aspiration most school leaders have, and that the only problem with focusing on behaving like an average school is it usually results in you being average. The average height of a UK male is 5’9”, but if we built ceilings at 5’10” we would have an epidemic of people with spinal issues from constantly stooping. So, if aiming for the average is not always the best option, how do you use benchmarking data to improve pupil outcomes? I would suggest that one alternative would be to aim for a Golden Mean instead of something distinctly average. 

The concept of the Golden Mean is not new, it appears in the work of Aristotle. It can be thought of as the point at which the perfect balance between excess and insufficiency is achieved. Aristotle was primarily writing about human virtue, but the concept holds good in a number of other domains. Organisationally, this is possibly best conceptualized as the point between two extremes, where the greatest good can be achieved for the greatest number of people, with the minimum amount of damage to the rest. 

Aristotle framed the Golden Mean in terms of three pillars: 

• Achieving a balanced state

This pillar is based on the idea that a healthy person is one for whom everything is in balance. For example, a healthy blood pressure is one which is considered neither excessively high nor low. As Leaders and Managers, part of our role is to maintain equilibrium and keep the balance within our organisations. Focusing too much energy and attention on one aspect of organisational activity may lead to a loss of quality and performance in another. The Golden Mean helps us find the right balance. Aristotle was very clear the balance is more frequently not the average, than it is the average, but it is easy to know when the Golden Mean is not being achieved when things are out of balance. Every choice has a consequence and an opportunity cost – a choice not to do something else. Balance is about ensuring the opportunity cost is not disproportionate to the benefit which will be achieved.   

• The Golden Mean is relative to individuals’ contexts

Aristotle’s second pillar is the idea that the Golden Mean is different for different people. The same is true of organisations. What works in one place will not necessarily work in another. In some circumstances more top-down models of leadership may be required, whereas, based on the degree of competence and level of organisational maturity, in others greater autonomy may be more appropriate. We may, as leaders need to invest time and money in different aspects of a school’s work, and those investments may push us away from the average, but closer to a Golden Mean. We need to recognise that every organisation is different, every member of staff is an individual and that there are rarely one-size-fits-all approaches that work universally. The Golden Mean is not, therefore, the middle point or average, it is the point which achieves balance in a specific context. However, the Golden mean teaches us that where there are limited resources, too much resourcing in one area will be detrimental to others.  

• Falling between two excesses

The final pillar is about recognising that the Golden Mean is a point that falls between two excesses. Over expenditure on staffing at the expense of maintaining the premises, updating IT, or properly resourcing those staff will negatively impact how effectively the staff can operate. Conversely, flashy new facilities, every pupil with a laptop and no expense spared on curriculum resources which results in excessive class sizes or an insufficient curriculum provision due to lack of investment in staff, will have different, but equally impactful deficiencies.  The Golden Mean is achieved when the needs of pupils for quality teachers and resources are in correct balance. 

When looking at benchmarking data, we often focus on the average, but perhaps we also need to focus on what the data is telling us would be excessive. The key is to find a Golden mean which maintains balance, is contextually appropriate and which avoids both excess and deficiency. Fortunately, School Resource Management Advisory work has evolved significantly and now focuses much more on this aspect of benchmarking.