Behaviour expectations are applied inconsistently by different staff
Expectations for behaviour are being applied differently by different members of staff.
Expectations for behaviour are being applied differently by different members of staff. Students adjust their behaviour according to which adult is present.
Presenting symptoms
- Behaviour differs noticeably between classrooms or areas.
- Students can name which adults will challenge them.
- Behaviour records vary markedly between staff teaching similar groups.
Possible causes
- The standard may not be as clear as leaders assume.
- Some colleagues may understand the expectation but not accept it.
- The expectation may be accepted but follow-through has drifted.
- The expectation may be unworkable in some settings.
The standard is not clear in practice.
Your most useful next step: Define the expectation concretely and show what it looks like before asking for greater consistency.
Lead behaviours
Colleagues are clear but do not agree with it.
Your most useful next step: Test whether the expectation is sound, then involve colleagues in clarifying how it should work.
Lead behaviours
Colleagues agree, but follow-through has drifted.
Your most useful next step: Re-establish follow-up and address persistent inconsistency directly.
Lead behaviours
There is not yet enough evidence to say.
Your most useful next step: Gather evidence through learning walks, behaviour data and student voice before deciding what kind of problem this is.
Lead behaviours
Core behaviours
Reinforces a consistent foundation. If leaders accept variation, inconsistency becomes the norm.
Embedding routines requires repetition and reinforcement as this behaviour ensures they stick.
The possible causes cannot be separated by impression, and acting on the wrong one wastes the effort.
Leaders must follow up relentlessly. This signals that consistency isn't optional, it's core.
When some staff don't uphold standards, leaders must have courageous conversations and follow through.
Secondary behaviours
Shared routines create predictability across the school, making it easier for students to meet expectations.
Use this where the expectation is unclear or contested. The book defines this as articulating the purpose behind a decision so that people understand rather than merely comply. An expectation that has been restated over time without its reason tends to be applied according to each adult’s own sense of what it is for, which is one source of the variation students are reading. Stating what the expectation protects gives colleagues a shared test for the situations the policy does not spell out.
Use this where colleagues understand the expectation and do not accept it. The book’s claim is that people commit to what they help to create, and that involvement produces ownership rather than compliance. It applies here to how the expectation works in practice, not to whether there is one. Colleagues who help settle how it applies in their own rooms and corridors are more likely to apply it when nobody is watching, and their objections may show where it is genuinely unworkable.
A useful first action
Gather evidence of where the variation actually sits before deciding what kind of problem it is.
Suggested approach
- Start by gathering clear evidence of inconsistency (learning walks, student voice, behaviour data).
- Use a leadership meeting to review agreed routines and expectations. Do they still reflect your standard?
- Make consistency a shared goal. Agree on what needs tightening, then support staff with walkthroughs, modelling, and feedback.
- Recognise departments or staff who are already getting it right. Use them as examples.
- Provide coaching or accountability where follow-through is weak.