In biology, the Black Queen Hypothesis describes the process whereby an ecosystem sometimes becomes dependent on just a few organisms providing essential functions. Remove them and balance shifts quickly.
Schools can behave the same way - where certain individuals have a sum of knowledge far greater than anyone else and become institutionally vital to its operations: the colleague who knows accreditation inside out. The timetable architect. The safeguarding memory bank.
If you have them and they stay, that’s fine - but what if they leave or are suddenly unavailable for a period of time? The knowledge and connections they hold suddenly disappear, leaving others adrift.
This is something we realised when we set about exploring social capital in our school through network analysis of professional interactions: who collaborates, who seeks advice, who shares practice. The visualisations were fascinating and humbling.
Collaboration and sharing knowledge
At first glance, it looked healthy. Plenty of connections, no obvious isolation and strong lines radiating from leadership.
But then we asked a different question: “What happens if we remove leadership from the network?” The result surprised us. Only a small portion of links remained.
This meant that if leaders were removed, collaboration would flounder. In our school, we saw this clearly during a period of intensive external engagement and accreditation work.
Departments with strong horizontal ties continued joint planning, lesson study conversations and resource sharing. Others became quieter, more contained. Professional dialogue slowed.
In response, we adapted in several ways to ensure that collaboration became central to our school’s DNA.
None of these adaptations was revolutionary. But together they thickened the “underwater” network in our school to help connections exist beyond leadership “hubs”.
Avoiding a ‘single point of failure’
From our network analysis, we also saw that we were too reliant on certain individuals for key institutional knowledge, and that we needed to distribute this knowledge to avoid a “single point of failure” if that person was unavailable.
As such, we instigated a raft of initiatives to do this:
1. Shadowing key operational roles
We began inviting staff to shadow colleagues responsible for complex operational functions.
For example, teachers spent time observing how accreditation evidence was assembled or how timetable constraints were negotiated across departments.
These sessions revealed the invisible cognitive work behind routine decisions and built appreciation for system interdependencies. Over time, shadowing reduced the sense that institutional knowledge belonged to individuals rather than to the organisation.
2. Documenting processes collaboratively
We moved away from procedural knowledge living in inboxes or memories. Instead of leadership drafting manuals, teams co-created process maps together, moderating coursework or planning service-learning events.
Collaborative documentation proved especially valuable during periods of staff mobility.
Because procedures were constructed collectively, they were trusted and used. More importantly, the act of documenting became developmental: it surfaced assumptions, clarified reasoning and strengthened shared understanding.
3. Rotating leadership responsibilities
Another shift involved rotating leadership of committees and initiatives. Whether coordinating climate education events, leading professional inquiry groups or overseeing student service projects, responsibilities were shared intentionally.
This broadened participation in decision making and allowed emerging leaders to develop confidence in authentic contexts. In practice, it strengthened continuity, as leadership capability became embedded across teams rather than attached to titles.
4. Mentoring successors early
We normalised early succession mentoring. Where staff led specialised functions like accreditation preparation, programme implementation or cross-campus collaboration, they were encouraged to involve colleagues long before transition became necessary.
This mentoring extended beyond procedural knowledge to include judgement, ambiguity management and strategic framing.
In a dynamic international-school environment, where mobility is part of professional life, this proactive approach proved essential for sustaining organisational memory.
Leadership beyond structure
Ultimately, schools have to strike a balance between having leaders as important cogs in the system and being able to be without them for periods of time without everything coming to a halt.
This requires cultivating a culture of collaboration through but also around leaders, and ensuring that knowledge does not sit with select individuals but is shared as widely as possible so operations are not interrupted by any one person’s absence.
Ildar Iliazov is principal of Light International School Mombasa in Kenya
