Never Enough Time: From Management to Leadership

Rabbi Yehoshua Krames

There is so much to be proud of in the world of chinuch today. Educational initiatives have found their way into classrooms, and students are increasingly engaged in active learning. Whether in a day school or cheder environment, classrooms look very different from how they did in the past. Rebbeim, moros, and teachers are finding ways to expand their capacity to reach a wider range of learners. Accommodating special education needs is becoming standard practice. Most mechanchim from ten years ago would hardly recognize their own classrooms today. 

Many educational leaders, however, will point to one area that has not kept pace: the role of administration in supporting the classroom. The average principal is pulled in many directions, leaving little time to develop as an instructional leader. What seems to be a principal’s most valuable asset—time—is often what works against their ability to lead and support. 

The role of principal, or school leader, is to effect progress through change. Every school leader has a list of best practices he or she believes would make a difference. Leaders should envision these initiatives, support their implementation, and see them take root. Yet, too often, these initiatives never truly take off. In real life, principals often present an idea, find someone to carry it forward, and hope it does not fade before it becomes standard practice.  

This leads to the assumption that if only they had more time and the capacity to invest more effort, they would have succeeded. But is the lack of time really the issue? Or is there something more fundamental slowing us down?  

Friction is a natural part of any system. How we manage it makes all the difference. Our instinct is to overcome friction by pushing harder. An airplane accelerates down a runway. Eventually, the plane reaches the speed needed for liftoff, and once in the air, it moves faster with less resistance. Momentum outpaces friction. 

But there is another approach. Consider a sled: on grass, it barely moves. On snow, the same sled glides effortlessly. The difference is not the effort or the momentum; it is the environment. When friction is reduced, progress happens naturally. 

Leadership requires this same shift in mindset. Instead of trying to outpace challenges, effective leadership focuses on eliminating obstacles within the system itself. When the conditions are right, progress does not need to be forced, and momentum builds on its own. In this article, I will present two leadership mindsets—one that relates to teaching staff and the other to students—that can drive meaningful and lasting change, as well as their practical application within a school setting. 

“Let Them” Leadership 

Mel Robbins, in her work on the “Let Them” theory, presents an idea that is simple yet deeply impactful. Human nature inclines us to control our surroundings. We want to feel in control, to feel secure. While there are aspects of our environment that we can control, people are not among them. Ultimately, individuals have free will and will make their own choices. Accepting this can be difficult, but it is also empowering. Let go and just “let them” make their choices. 

Letting go does not mean leaders do not care. It is not about ignoring problems or avoiding responsibility. It is easy to misinterpret this idea as passivity, but that would be a mistake. “Let them” simply recognizes that people never truly have control over others to begin with. 

The real power lies in what comes next. When people make their choices, leaders have the opportunity to respond. At this stage, the leader’s mindset and values, as well as the chosen response, are fully within his or her control. 

“Let them” is only half the idea. The second half is “let me.” It is about allowing leaders to remain grounded in who they are. Instead of focusing on judging others, the focus shifts inward, influenced by the person’s own attitude and response. 

Here’s an example you can likely relate to. You’re in shul listening to a chazan who is really dragging things out. Perhaps you begin to feel frustrated. Thoughts like, “Does he love his own voice that much?” or “I’m going to lose my mind!”might start running through your head.  

“Let them” means letting him do his thing. He’s going to daven the way he wants. Getting upset about it won’t change anything. Now comes “let me.” You can decide how you want to respond. You can leave in a huff, go to another shul next time, or choose to stay because you chose this minyan for a reason, and it’s not worth making a change. Whatever you choose, you save a tremendous amount of emotional energy. Once you “let him” be a chazan the way he wants and then consciously choose your response, the frustration fades. If you stay, it’s no longer something being done to you; it’s a decision you made, and it’s OK. 

Let’s turn to an example that can happen in school. You have pushed a classroom initiative that has great promise. You find out that a teacher is not using your initiative, and all the problems that your initiative was designed to prevent are happening in the class. It’s easy to become frustrated, checking in with the teacher repeatedly—pushing harder—and feeling the resistance build, like pushing a heavy sled across the grass. 

You can take a different approach. “Let them” means recognizing that teachers will often make their own choices. You can’t force genuine buy-in. You can’t control people. Then comes “let me.” You decide how to respond. Is the initiative so critical that you continue to push the teacher? Is it a matter of principle, where policy dictates that the teacher can’t be ignored? Or do you recognize that the teacher is doing many other things well, so it makes sense to back off for the time being?  

Whatever you choose, it becomes a conscious decision. You remain in control, not by forcing the situation, but by choosing your response. That shift saves a great deal of time and emotional energy. Instead of getting pulled into frustration, you move forward with clarity. You’ve “let them,” and then you’ve chosen how to lead. “Let them” removes the emotional weight of trying to control others. “Let me” keeps the focus on how you respond. 

True leadership is recognizing that while we cannot control the choice itself, we can control our response, and that response shapes what happens next. Too often, leaders exhaust themselves trying to control behavior instead of guiding it.Rather than being an abdication of leadership, a passive response can be a positive leadership choice. True influence comes from the position of leadership. When principals take ownership of their response and decide the next step with clarity, they reinforce their leadership. That’s what builds respect and leads to far greater influence. 

This idea has powerful implications. The less people try to control others, the more influence they actually gain through their response. Influence comes from how consistently leaders respond. Principals lead through their actions, shaping the direction of their school with clarity and follow-through. If they’re prepared for a range of reactions and can still stay on course, their confidence grows and so does their influence. 

Responsibility-Centered Discipline 

Schools inevitably struggle with behavioral challenges. While they vary in form, they stem from the same core issue: student engagement. Teachers prepare meaningful lessons, yet students disrupt the learning environment.  

Larry Thompson’s Responsibility-Centered Discipline reframes this challenge not as a behavioral issue alone, but as a question of ownership. Students engage when they see personal benefit. Like all people, they are motivated by success they believe is attainable. Common barriers, such as a lack of relevance, perceived unfairness, or gaps in understanding, lead to disengagement. RCD addresses this through structured conversations that clarify expectations and highlight personal benefit. The goal is not compliance, but ownership. 

The framework for these structured conversations is simple, often referred to as “Give ’em 5”: expectation, breakdown, benefit, support, and closure. At first, it can sound a bit intimidating, almost like a therapy session, but in practice, it’sjust a short, focused conversation. With experience, it becomes quick and natural. 

Here’s a sample conversation: “Class starts at 9:00 (expectation), and you came in late (breakdown). I know mornings can be tough (support), but when you miss the beginning, it’s harder to follow the rest of the lesson (benefit). What can you do to get here on time, so you’ll learn better in class?” (closure) 

The critical moment in these interactions comes when the student recognizes that the situation is not about the teacher or the school. The teacher isn’t upset because the student was late and disturbed their lesson. The clear message is that coming late is going to work against the student, harming his or her ability to understand the material. 

Schools come up with behavior plans for students, but they are often generic. Students sense this, so they struggle to see that the goal is about them and not the institution. Real change happens when students take ownership and develop their own plans for success. This shift from feeling that external control is being exerted on them to a feeling of internal responsibility achieves more than good classroom management. It fosters a culture of calm and collaboration, where students are stakeholders in both their own and the school’s success. 

Finding Time 

The principle of student ownership reflects a broader truth: people care about what they own. This applies equally to leadership. By adopting a “Let Them” mindset, school leaders create the conditions for staff to take ownership. Leadership remains active, while allowing space for growth. 

Ultimately, this is the difference between managing and leading. When everything is controlled, people disengage. When there is space within clear expectations, people begin to take initiative, think more deeply, and feel responsible for the outcome. When people feel safe, they take risks, accept feedback, and grow. In such an environment, leadership shifts from pushing to enabling. When these elements come together—ownership, clarity, and trust—schools operatewith far less friction.  

When a principal is managing, constantly reacting and correcting, time becomes an impossibly limited resource. There is never enough of it. But when leadership is structured around ownership and alignment, the role changes. Leadership is no longer defined by how much one does personally, but by how effectively one builds people and systems.  

The truth is that time is not the most valuable asset; leadership is. When leadership is applied well, time slows down. The school moves forward not through constant effort, but through clarity, alignment, and shared purpose. This allows principals to move beyond managing what is in front of them now to truly leading a school toward what it can become. 

Rabbi Yehoshua Krames, after many years as a classroom rebbe, became the menahel of Yeshiva Eitz Chaim in Toronto. He was known in the classroom for effectively implementing differentiated instruction and for mentoring rebbeim in instructional and leadership practices. Holding a master’s degree in educational leadership, he also provides leadership coaching and consulting for educators and school leaders, and can be reached at chinuchleadership@gmail.com 

• Print
• Email