Structural Analysis of Mountain Top SD
Mountain Top School District is located in one of the New England states and serves
eight communities over two states. The district operates two elementary schools with preschool
through eighth-grade students and one comprehensive high school. There are approximately 250
total employees that span many different departments. The final governance of the school district
is made by seven elected school board members who serve three-year terms. No requirements,
other than residency, prohibit anyone from running for one of the school board seats.
Structural Analysis
According to Ahmed (2019), the structural frame exists in functioning organizations to
develop and integrate established missions, visions, and goals, which helps deter personal
agendas that can damage organizations. Additionally, the structural frame allows organizations
to create a hierarchy of job functions and accountability to achieve their shared goals while
understanding the varying interpersonal relationships needed (Bolman & Deal, 2021).
Chain of Command
Bolman and Deal (2021) discuss how some organizations have transparent and respected
chains of command; typically, educational systems have hierarchies that are often challenged and
unclear distinctions between the levels of management. Research suggests that organizations
must establish a transparent chain of command structures to create accountability and decision-
making matrixes and ensure that every task can be traced to the job description (Reenock et al.,
2021). As the size of an organization increases, it is clear that its chains of command must be
established so employees fully understand their responsibilities and to whom they should report.
The chain of command can vary significantly from school district to school district,
especially when comparing structures in different states. In the Mountain Top School District, no
formal chain of command is established in policy or writing; however, there is a historical
Structural Analysis of Mountain Top SD
understanding of the district's hierarchy. From top to bottom, the chain of command begins with
the elected school board, superintendent, assistant superintendent, department directors, building
principals, and assistant principals, and ends with teachers and support staff. In this model, the
school board has the final authority of the school district to approve all policies, expenditures,
contracts, and hiring. The superintendent is charged with leading the development of these areas
so the board can be adequately informed before making decisions.
While there should be consideration for the Mountain Top School District to create a
formal hierarchy, there are some cautionary considerations in developing the flow chart.
Teachers are considered the frontline workers of education. Sometimes, they should be allowed
to provide valuable feedback about a particular initiative or policy implementation in the
classroom. Bolman and Deal (2021) state that a strict chain can slow the advance of information
and sometimes create a disconnect between the final decision-makers and those who implement
the decisions. Mountain Top School District should consider developing a chain of command
that keeps efficiency in decision-making as a top priority.
Span of Control
Acharya et al. (2017) discuss that span of control refers to the number of employees who
report to a leader, as well as the structure of hierarchy that highlights the varying levels of
management. The authors also mention that there is no recipe for a successful span-of-control
model and that each organization should consider its unique purpose. Jensen et al. (2022) suggest
careful consideration is taken to ensure the span of control is narrow enough, as this can lead to
strained relationships between leaders and employees.
Like the chain of command structures, there needs to be more formalization of the span
of control structures in the Mountain Top School District. A review of various job descriptions
Structural Analysis of Mountain Top SD
demonstrates inconsistencies in identifying whom certain employees report. While the span of
control is not written in a formal procedure, and some evidence within the varying job
descriptions indicates whom an employee reports to, there appears to be some understanding of a
span of control within the district. Support staff members are assigned to the assistant principals
at the school building level and professional staff report to the building principal. All three
schools have similar staffing numbers, with each administrator responsible for about 25
employees.
The span of control broadens at the school district administrative office. The
superintendent oversees all building principals, the assistant superintendent, the finance
administrator, the director of instruction, and the director of student services. The assistant
superintendent supervises all the directors of maintenance, human resources, technology,
transportation, and food service. Finance is the largest of the departments at the district office,
and the administrator oversees three employees. Finally, the superintendent answers to the
elected board of directors, who are supposed to be held accountable by the constituents that vote
them into office.
Departmentalization Structures
Mountain Top School District has nine significant departments overseen by directors and
the superintendent. These departments include student instructional services, federal grants,
technology, student support services, human resources, business operations, facilities operations,
transportation, and food services. In most of these departments, there is support staff whom the
directors oversee. Directors and building principals have much autonomy for decision-making as
long as they stay within the conventional school board policies and the established fiscal
resources.
Structural Analysis of Mountain Top SD
Departments also exist at the building level, with clear distinctions at the high schools.
The two elementary schools are broken into two central departments of teachers; primary and
middle school. High school departments are directly related to academic content and career and
technical education programs. While not common, some research suggests that elementary
schools consider departmentalization to increase student academic performance (Day, 2019).
The Mountain Top School District briefly researched this approach before the Covid pandemic;
however, more research and a capacity self-assessment must be completed for further
consideration.
Decision Making
Mountain Top School District has a history of shared leadership. As previously
mentioned, many personnel along the span of control have the autonomy to make decisions as
long as they stay within the approved policies and procedures of the school district. Decisions
that impact instructional practices are typically made in a collaborative setting between district
administrators, building principals, and teacher leaders. This type of shared leadership in
decision-making is a characteristic of a highly effective team (Bowman & Deal, 2021) and can
allow the school district to implement change quickly for higher student achievement. At the
district level, the superintendent, and their designees, also have the autonomy for the majority of
decision-making. The only exception is fiscal purchases that exceed $5,000 and approval of new
hires, as these need to be approved by the school board.
Centralized/Decentralized Continuum
Centralized organizations are mainly operated under the direction of a single person who
sets the organization’s goals and decides based on those goals. In contrast, decentralized
organizations pass down decision-making to lower-level leaders and groups (Bililies, 2016).
Structural Analysis of Mountain Top SD
organizations function When factoring in the verbiage of many of the Mountain Top policies, it
would be logical to think the district operates more on the centralized side of the organizational
continuum. In reality, while the school board has the final say, they put a lot of trust and faith in
the people they have hired to operate the school district. The superintendent embraces shared
leadership, and administrators are given much autonomy to manage their building or department.
Taking these indicators, the Mountain Top School District mainly operates in the middle of the
centralized and decentralized organizational continuum.
Staff/Line Distinctions
The Mountain Top School District is a union district with three unions for administrators,
teachers, and support staff. All three agreements include language about roles and
responsibilities and language to follow the established chain of command. Furthermore, there is
verbiage identifying the process for filing a complaint if someone feels professional boundaries
have been breached. Staff/line distinctions are established and maintained through the various
collective bargaining agreements, job descriptions, and school board policy.
Analysis Summary
The Mountain Top School District has many structural characteristics for an effective
organization. Decision-making is straightforward and relies on a shared leadership model. There
is a span of control, and job descriptions highlight who an employee’s direct supervisor is.
Principals and assistant principals have the most significant number of employees they are
responsible for, and most central office supervisors only have one or two employees. A historical
chain of command begins with support staff members and goes to the top decision-makers, the
elected school board. The Mountain Top School District could benefit from formalizing and
Structural Analysis of Mountain Top SD
References
Acharya, A., Lieber, R., Seem, L., & Welchman, T. (2017, December 21). How to identify the
right ‘spans of control’ for your organization. McKinsey & Company Organizational
Performance. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-
performance/our-insights/how-to-identify-the-right-spans-of-control-for-your-
organization#/
Ahmed, E. I. (2019). School change management: A multi-frame analysis. Journal of Education
in Black Sea Region, 4(2), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.31578/jebs.v4i2.169
Bililies, T. (2016, April). Centralization versus decentralization: What is right for you? Alix
Partners. https://www.alixpartners.com/media/14446/ap_centralization_versus_
decentralization_apr_2016.pdf
Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. E. (2021). Reframing organizations (7th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Day, M. (2019). Teachers’ and administrators’ perceptions of departmentalization in elementary
schools [Doctoral dissertation, Lincoln Memorial University]. Lincoln Memorial
University Digital Archive. https://digitalcommons.lmunet.edu/edddissertations/7
Jenson, D. C., Hansen, A. L., Pedersen, L. D., & Andersen, L. B. (2022). Span of control and
ethical leadership in highly professionalized public organizations. Public Personnel
Management, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1077/00910260221140398
Reenock, C., Konisky, D. M., & Uttermark, M. J. (2021). Chain of command vs. who’s in
command: Structure, politics, and regulatory enforcement. Policy Studies Journal, 50(4),
797-821. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12425
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
