By Himal Randeniya · 15 September 2026
For leaders supporting several services, the same policy or completed form can mean different things to different teams. A shared expectation becomes useful when people understand its purpose and know what it asks them to do in their setting.
The argument I developed while preparing for the Early Childhood Council’s 2026 conference was about that connection. How do we help people reconnect with the purpose of their work, and create conditions in which their everyday choices reflect it?
The Wellington conference brought owners, managers and teachers together around the power of choice. For me, one of the most consequential choices is the context we create around what we ask our teams to do.
Make the purpose visible
Consider a planning discussion. A leader might ask a teacher to complete an entry before the end of the week. That communicates a deadline. The teacher may still need to understand what the entry should help the team notice, discuss or decide.
A more useful conversation connects the work to its purpose: what are we learning about this child, how will that inform our response, and who else can help us understand?
This is an illustrative example, not an account of a particular centre. It shows the distinction I want leaders to examine. We can communicate the task, the reason for it and the professional judgement it requires.
The deadline may remain. The meaning around it becomes clearer.
Look at behaviour as well as reassuring answers
Most leaders want an open, thoughtful culture. Assessing that culture takes more than asking whether people feel comfortable approaching us.
We can look at what happens when an educator is unsure. Can they ask for help? What happens when someone notices a gap between the stated approach and everyday practice? Does a concern lead to a conversation and follow-through?
These questions make culture more concrete. They also ask something of the leader. Our response to uncertainty helps people understand what it is safe to bring into the room.
If we want teachers to be reflective, we need to make room for reflection that reveals a difficulty. If we want concerns raised early, we need to take them seriously and respond.
Connect expectations across a group
For a leader supporting several services, a shared expectation is only the beginning. Each team needs to understand how to apply it in its own setting.
A useful discussion can start with one expectation and three questions:
- What is this intended to support or protect?
- What would we expect to see people doing?
- How will we find out whether the expectation is understood and working?
Different services may need different support. One may need clarity about the purpose. Another may need time to practise a skill. Another may be working through a process that makes the desired behaviour difficult.
Those differences matter. A common form alone cannot tell a leader which response would help.
I would use visibility to open a better conversation: where should we look more closely, what do we need to understand and how can we support the team?
Make reflection specific
A broad instruction to improve quality can leave a team with little to act on. One carefully chosen situation gives people something to examine together.
For example, a leader and teacher might revisit a recent planning decision. What did the teacher notice? What informed the response? What happened next? What would they retain or change?
The discussion can respect the teacher’s judgement while making the reasoning visible. It can also reveal a support need that a completion count would miss.
The value comes from the conversation and what the team does with it.
Ask technology to support capability
The same thinking applies when a service considers AI.
I want to know whether a tool helps an educator or leader understand their work more deeply. Can they inspect the evidence? Can they question an interpretation? Are responsibilities clear? Does the workflow give them a useful basis for a professional conversation?
An output can be polished without answering those questions. We need to consider what the person learns and what they remain responsible for as well as what gets produced.
For a group leader, the practical question is how information will lead to support and action. A signal is useful when someone understands it, considers its context and decides what to do next.
The leader still needs to make sense of the information and follow through.
Choose one conversation to change
The starting point does not need to be an organisation-wide programme.
Choose one recurring piece of work. Listen to how the team currently talks about it. Ask what purpose it serves, what makes it difficult and what good practice would look like in the setting.
Then decide one thing to change: perhaps the explanation, the support, the process or the way the team reviews it. Return to the conversation and find out what happened.
My thesis is that professional purpose becomes meaningful through these everyday choices. Leaders help make the connection visible, and keep learning about whether the conditions they create support the practice they want.
For the wider technology discussion, read How to win in the age of AI in ECE. Start the leadership conversation with a simpler question: what do our teams understand this work is for?
