Higher Performance Insights | YOU WERE BORN A GENIUS. SCHOOL FIXED THAT
Inside The June Roundtable Where District And Campus Leaders Finally Said The Quiet Part Out Loud.
THE PAPERCLIP. SIXTY SECONDS. AND A ROOM FULL OF GENIUSES.
Here's a question eleven educational leaders answered before 10:00 AM on June 3rd: How many uses can you list for a paperclip in sixty seconds?
The chat filled fast. Restart your modem. Fishhook. Lockpick. Holding hair back out of your eyes. Key ring.
The best one — from Kim LeClaire, Education Advisor and Strategist out of Denver — the one that stopped the room: the paper clip that held her rain cape together as she walked the Camino de Santiago.
Then the data landed.
In 1968, NASA commissioned Dr. George Land to build a test to find the most innovative thinkers on the planet. He gave it to 1,600 children aged four and five. Ninety-eight percent scored at genius level — the same standard NASA used for rocket scientists.
He retested them at age ten: 30 percent. At fifteen: 12 percent. He then tested 280,000 adults.
Two percent.
Land's conclusion: non-creative behavior is learned. We are not born uncreative. We are taught — institution by institution, grade by grade — to believe the paperclip is only for paper.
That conclusion is the premise of every Peer-to-Peer Leadership Roundtable Higher Performance Group convenes. And it was Kim (for the win) who named what the data actually means for every institution in that room:
"How do we support the human capacity for creativity?"
That is not a warm-up exercise. It is the essential question for every institution these eleven leaders walk into every day. And on June 3rd — leaders from Washington and Minnesota, Ohio and Virginia, Texas and Illinois, K–12 districts and college campuses — they spent sixty minutes attempting to answer it together.
Not with frameworks. With the room thinking out loud.
THE DIAGNOSIS: YOUR SILOS ARE STRUCTURAL, NOT PERSONAL — AND THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING
Let's talk about this like adults who've survived multiple accreditation cycles, bond referendums, and at least one strategic planning retreat where the mission statement got wordsmithed for four hours while the actual problem waited patiently in the parking lot.
Silos are not a character failure. They are not a communication problem. They are not evidence that your VPs don't respect each other — although, statistically, two of them might not.
Dr. Rick W. Smith Sr., CFRL, CCDP President of Dallas College North Lake — a former hospital administrator for 23 years, then a decade in television news, now a decade in higher education — named it with the precision of someone who has led three entirely different systems:
"Silos are often the unintended consequence of how organizations are organized, measured, and — too many times — rewarded. The challenge is ensuring those priorities remain connected to institutional goals."
That reframe changes the entire fix. If silos are a character failure, you call a retreat. You invest in communication training. You hire a consultant who facilitates a trust exercise that everyone finds mildly uncomfortable and immediately forgets.
If silos are structural — the predictable output of incentive architecture — you redesign who makes decisions, where resources flow, and how information moves between people who serve the same students but rarely occupy the same room.
TQ = IQ × EQ × PQ. The PQ dimension — Perceptual Intelligence, the capacity to accurately read what's actually happening in your institution — depends on this. You cannot build organizational perceptual accuracy when the structural design actively prevents the right people from seeing the whole picture.
And here's what our research across 987 leadership teams in 43 states tells us: the teams operating at 60% capacity aren't there because of talent deficits. They're there because the architecture was never designed for multiplication.
(This is the exact problem THE TEAM INSTITUTE was built to address — not by making individuals better at working around broken structures, but by helping cabinets redesign the architecture itself. More on that in a moment.)
In a BANI environment — Brittle, Anxious, Nonlinear, Incomprehensible — architecture optimized for Coasters isn't just inefficient. It becomes existentially dangerous.
Dr. Nathan S. Schilling, CSBO, Superintendent of Lansing School District 158 brought the session's most vivid metaphor: his 1973 Mustang, purchased specifically after confirming it had undergone a full frame-off restoration — all body paneling removed, foundational work done first, then reassembled.
"Some restorations slap new panels over a completely rusted frame. That looks great inside — it's completely rusted and falling apart."
That is the institutional response most strategic plans represent: new panels, rusted frame. The leaders in this room are not interested in new panels.
THE FRAMEWORK: BUILDERS, DREAMERS, COASTERS, AND CLIMBERS
Not every leader in your institution responds to BANI the same way. Our research names four behavioral patterns that show up in every institution navigating disruption — and the distribution matters more than the diagnosis.
The framework exists not to celebrate the people in the room but to name the structures around them. A Builder can lead an institution still optimized for Coasters. The challenge is not character — it is architecture.
The difference between a Builder and a Dreamer is not ambition. Dreamers are often spectacularly ambitious. The difference is specificity: does what you just committed to have a date, a name, and a measurable outcome? Without all three, it is a dream, not a plan.
Rick Aulie, first-year superintendent of CROSBY IRONTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS - ISD 182 on Schools in Minnesota, offered the session's most precise illustration of BANI lived rather than theorized. He navigated 36 staffing changes since July 1st — two new principals, a new tech director, a retiring HR director — in a district of 950 students. Two buildings, two and a half miles apart. Completely different emotional climates. Same leadership. Same year. A referendum won on the third attempt.
That is not exceptional talent. That is a Builder who looked at brittleness, anxiety, nonlinearity, and incomprehensibility and said: this is the design brief. What are we building?
WHAT ELEVEN LEADERS SAID WHEN THE ROOM FINALLY GOT HONEST
The session's most productive stretch was not a structured exercise. It was the sixty minutes after the framework landed — when every leader in the room stopped performing a role and started describing what they've actually seen.
On the Handoff Gap Between K–12 and Higher Education
Jason Mantell, Superintendent of OAK HILL UNION LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT in southern Ohio, described a relationship with local universities that most districts would call unusual: genuinely collaborative. He didn't study the teacher shortage. He made the call.
"We went to local universities and said: we need to start a teacher-in program in high school. We need to find out when kids are 17 or 18, not when they're sophomores in college." That program now exists.
"It really hasn't been a battle. It's been more of an engagement."
Dr. Richmond Hill, Ed.D., Provost at Northern Virginia Community College described what happens when you run the cross-sector play correctly. In February, his campus convened a math faculty summit with the local school district — not a planning meeting, but faculty from both institutions in the same room.
"Now they are doing it on their own. We don't have to convene them any longer."
That sentence contains an entire theory of institutional change. The organizer eventually becomes unnecessary. That is not a program. It is relationship infrastructure.
On the Students Falling Through the Gap
Dr. Nathan Schilling brought the micro-step perspective the macro conversation consistently loses. His late brother Aaron graduated from high school, enrolled at a four-year college, didn't find his footing, came home, enrolled at Oakton Community College, earned A's and B's, transferred to Northern Illinois University, earned his degree, became a director of finance for a school district.
Community college was the bridge. Not everyone needs the same path. The question is whether you've built the micro-steps.
Melanie Matta, Superintendent/Principal of Hope Elementary in Porterville, California, brought the student-voice methodology down to daily practice. She surveyed her students: what do you want your classroom environment to look like? Who on campus do you feel connected to? What parts of your day feel like a waste of time?
"Several of them said lunch. Lunch was a waste of time. And I'm like — okay. How could we restructure lunch so that it doesn't feel like a waste of time to them?"
That is not a listening session. That is design thinking as daily leadership practice.
On the Third System Nobody Talks About
Yianni (John) Vassiliou, Ph.D., Chancellor at Albizu University - Miami Campus, named the system that sits at the end of the pipeline — and that both K–12 and higher education consistently fail to connect with: the workforce.
"No one is going to any institution to get a piece of paper and put it on the wall. They're going to get something — knowledge that will apply to real work. So it's our due diligence to find those opportunities for them."
Vassiliou launched four new programs at Albizu this fall — intersecting behavioral science with AI, wearable technology, and cybersecurity — specifically because he went to local organizations, asked what they actually need, and built curriculum around the connection.
On What Leaders Are Actually Carrying
Dr. Ellen Perconti, Superintendent of Goldendale School District #404 in Washington, days from the end of a distinguished career, described the emotional texture of transition that most leaders are too professional to name: "People start routing around you before you've gone."
She brought the session's sharpest readiness reframe:
"Our Kinder teachers say that incoming children are not prepared for school. My response is — so how do we prepare for the students who will come this fall? We want to maintain high expectations and build different supports for students to succeed."
Kim LeClaire connected the personal to the institutional. She named student voice as a structural choice, not an oversight:
"Rarely do I see in any organization bringing in the people we serve into the leadership discussions — literally student voice as we discuss issues. It's an art to design the experience with them at the table."
Dr. Richmond Hill extended that principle with the closing metaphor of the cross-sector exchange: "We often plan a party for a person — bring chocolate cake and ice cream — and they hate chocolate cake and are lactose intolerant. We brought the wrong thing to the right party. All because we didn't ask the guest of honor."
"We do this in education a lot."
And Dr. Michael Lubelfeld, completing 30 years as superintendent as of June 30th, named what runs through all of it: "It's 2026 and we are now preparing for the 22nd century. Whether we're publics or privates, charters or micros, profit or nonprofit — we are one team and we're team society."
DR. JOE HILL closed the cross-sector exchange with the observation that named what made June 3rd different from every regional conference these leaders had attended:
"What you just did is rare. A superintendent and a president describing the same student from two sides of the same handoff. That gap is a silo. It belongs to both of you. Neither of you can fix it alone. The question is not whether you need each other. It is what you are willing to build."
40 million Americans hold college credits and no credential. Not because they quit. Because the handoff infrastructure was never built. 60% of community college students who intend to transfer never complete it.
Superintendents: those are your graduates. Presidents: those students started in your buildings.
That number belongs to both sectors. And the leaders in this room are the ones choosing to own it.
THE APPLICATION: FOUR MOVES. THIS WEEK.
Here's what to do Monday morning — assuming you're not already in crisis mode, in which case, bookmark this and do it Tuesday:
Move 1: Name Your One Silo (15 minutes, before your next cabinet meeting)
Kim LeClaire closed the session with the sharpest challenge of the morning: What is the ONE silo you will undo before end of year?
Not "we need to improve cross-functional collaboration." That is a Dreamer sentence. A Builder sentence has a wall, a date, and a phone call. Name the specific structural gap that costs your students the most. Write it down. Give it a deadline. Name who you need to call.
If you can't answer that in fifteen minutes, you don't have a clarity problem. You have an avoidance problem.
Move 2: Ask the Guest of Honor (next time you're near students)
Melanie Matta surveyed her students on what feels like a waste of time and then asked them how to fix it. Dr. Richmond Hill described a college president who skipped the conference circuit and went to the commons area to listen. Dr. Yianni Vassiliou brought K–12 principals into his campus and said: tell me your actual challenges.
The wisdom of proximity over performance. Your students are not the guest of honor at your strategic planning sessions. Fix that.
Move 3: Make the Cross-Sector Call (one specific person, one specific ask)
Jason Mantell made the call to local universities about a teacher pathway. Dr. Richmond Hill got math faculty from both institutions in the same room. Dr. Rick Smith built the Dallas College Next Gen Sector Partnerships table — industry, secondary institutions, legislators, all at once — because he understood: no one side finds the resolution alone.
One call. Not a task force. Not a committee. The person on the other side of the handoff your students are falling through.
Move 4: Apply the Builder Test (before your next board presentation)
Before your next initiative launch, your next "we should really...": Does it have a date? Does it have a name attached to it? Does it have a measurable outcome that tells you in 90 days whether it worked?
If not, it's a dream. Dr. Lubelfeld closed the session with the phrase that ran through it all:
"Be about it. Don't just talk about it. That's kindergarten innovation at the highest leadership level."
Two Objections, Handled:
"We've tried cross-sector work before and it didn't stick."
Ask the question Dr. Rick Smith's reframe demands: was it the initiative that failed, or the incentive architecture you were trying to build it inside? If the structure rewards siloed performance, collaboration programs die between fiscal years. Every time. Without exception. The fix is not more buy-in. The fix is redesigning what gets measured.
"We don't have capacity for new partnerships right now."
You are currently paying the cost of every student who falls through the handoff gap. That cost is invisible on your budget and enormous in your outcomes. You don't have capacity to keep paying it. You just haven't calculated it yet.
THE MATURITY SHIFT
Immature leaders treat BANI as a threat to be survived. Mature leaders treat BANI as a design brief for what to build next.
Immature leaders bring students the chocolate cake and ice cream. Mature leaders ask the guest of honor what they actually want — and build the party around the answer.
The difference between a Builder and everyone else isn't talent. It's that a Builder asks: what specifically am I willing to commit to, with a date, by which I can be held accountable? And then answers it out loud. In the room. Before the meeting ends.
Your turn: Name the ONE specific silo your institution will unbuild before December 31. Not a vision statement. A wall, a date, a phone call. Drop it in the comments. Tag the colleague on the other side of the handoff.
If you were in the room on June 3rd — you know who you are. The room was better for having you in it. Drop your one word.
THE TEAM INSTITUTE
Here is the uncomfortable truth the June 3 roundtable made plain: most leadership development programs are designed to make individual leaders better at operating inside broken collective architecture.
You leave the conference sharper. You return to the cabinet. The cabinet is the same. The incentive structure is the same. The silos are the same. Within sixty days, the insight has paid the full translation tax and you are back to managing the same structural problems with marginally better frameworks.
That is not a development failure. It is an architectural one.
What the leaders in the June session were actually demonstrating — cross-sector table-building, student voice integration, faculty summit convening, workforce pipeline creation — is Level II work. It requires a cabinet that has been built for multiplication, not just individual competence. A room where the right questions get asked and held open.
THE TEAM INSTITUTE is an 8-month sequential development journey for full leadership cabinets — not individual leaders, but the collective architecture they operate inside. Built for superintendents and university presidents who have done everything right individually and are ready to build the system that multiplies what they've already built.
From our research across 987 leadership teams in 43 states: 3× performance improvement. 29% higher engagement. 27% better organizational outcomes. Zero burnout increase.
One requirement: full cabinet participation. Partial collective architecture is not architecture. It is a majority position wearing the name of the whole.
If you recognize the gap between your cabinet's individual talent and what they are collectively producing — and you are done explaining that gap as a communication problem — this is the conversation worth having. Schedule a 30-minute consultation: https://calendly.com/higherperformance/30minutecoffee
THE ROOM THAT MADE THIS HAPPEN
The following eleven leaders gave their time on June 3rd voluntarily, without compensation, because they believe the conversation is worth having. Every insight in this issue came from them.
Dr. Michael Lubelfeld · Featured Moderator
Superintendent (retiring June 30, 2026), North Shore SD 112. Author of The Unlearning Leader and The Unfinished Teacher. 2025 ISTE-ASCD Generation AI Fellow. Closed with the session's defining phrase: "Be about it. Don't just talk about it."
Dr. Joe Seabrooks Jr.
President, Cedar Valley Campus, Dallas College. 30+ years in higher education workforce development. Set the session's authenticity tone: resist the pursuit of perfection and be who you are in the moment.
Dr. Rick W. Smith Sr.
President, North Lake Campus, Dallas College. Former hospital administrator 23 years. Delivered the structural diagnosis: silos are the predictable output of how organizations are organized, measured, and rewarded.
Dr. Richmond Hill, Ed.D.
Provost, Woodbridge Campus, Northern Virginia Community College. Built the math faculty summit that became self-sustaining. Named the goal: "The organizer eventually becomes unnecessary.
Dr. Ellen Perconti
Superintendent, Goldendale School District, Washington. Completing a distinguished career June 2026. The session's sharpest readiness reframe: the question is not whether students are prepared for our system — it's whether our system is prepared for them.
Dr. Nathan Schilling
Superintendent, Lansing School District 158, Illinois. Brought the 1973 Mustang frame-off restoration metaphor. Shared his late brother Aaron's story as a testament to the micro-step.
Dr. Yianni Vassiliou
Chancellor, Miami Campus, Albizu University. Named the workforce as the third missing system. Launched four new programs at the intersection of behavioral science, AI, and wearable technology.
Melanie Matta
Superintendent/Principal, Hope Elementary School District, Porterville, CA. Author of Unwritten. Brought student voice to life: surveyed students on what feels like a waste of time, then asked them how to fix it.
Kim LeClaire
Education Advisor & Strategist, Denver, CO. Opened with the essential question: "How do we support the human capacity for creativity?" Closed with the sharpest challenge: name the ONE silo you will unbuild before year's end.
Rick Aulie
Superintendent, Crosby-Ironton Schools, Crosby, MN. First-year superintendent. Navigated 36 staffing changes and won a referendum on the third attempt. The session's most precise illustration of BANI lived — not theorized.
Jason Mantell
Superintendent, Oak Hill Union Local, Ohio. Built a teacher-in program and Ohio's first pre-med/athletic trainer hybrid pathway. His philosophy: "It really hasn't been a battle. It's been an engagement."
JOIN THE AUGUST 5TH SESSION
The next Peer-to-Peer Leadership Roundtable is Wednesday, August 5, 2026, at 10:30 AM CST. Same format. Different room. Eleven more leaders who've decided the conversation is worth having.
If the June session left you poked — if something in the silo-mapping conversation named something you've been carrying — don't just agree with it. The August session is where you come to do something about it.
Register for August 5th: higherperformancegroup.com/p2p-page
FOUND VALUE IN THIS?
Help other educational leaders find it:
→ Repost with your answer to the Builder Test: name the one silo your institution will unbuild before October.
→ Tag a leader you've watched make the cross-sector call — someone who didn't wait for a committee.
→ Comment with one word. If you were in the room on June 3rd, you know exactly what to say.
The more educational leaders who shift from individual development to collective architecture, the better our institutions become.
Follow DR. JOE HILL and Higher Performance Group for weekly Team Intelligence insights.
Looking to Accelerate Your Team Performance in 2026-2027? Check out THE TEAM INSTITUTE. New cohorts now enrolling.
Help Spread the Word
If you found value in this post, we’d love your help spreading the word! Please consider sharing this on your favorite social media platform and tag Higher Performance Group and Dr. Joe Hill. Your support helps us reach and inspire more awesome people like you!
Like What You've Read?
Get practical, research-based ideas to Accelerate
Higher Team Performance delivered straight to your inbox every Tuesday.
More Blog Articles



