How Long Does It Take to Recruit a Headteacher?

A practical guide for proprietors, boards and trustees

Boards consistently underestimate this, and the underestimate is where most headship recruitment goes wrong. Not the shortlisting, not the interview, but a plan built on a timeline that was never realistic.

Many proprietors tell us they expected to fill the post in a term and it took a year. It’s understandable, because the process itself isn’t long. What extends it is the notice period at the end and, frequently, the round that doesn’t produce a viable appointment.

How long does it actually take?

Two terms is the realistic answer for a permanent headship appointment in an independent special school or alternative provision. Around six to nine months from deciding to recruit to the person starting.

That breaks down roughly as follows.

Two to four weeks: preparation. Agreeing what you’re looking for, writing the job description and person specification, preparing the candidate pack, deciding whether to advertise, search or both.

Three to four weeks: advertising. Shorter than this and strong candidates who are currently employed won’t have time to consider it properly.

One to two weeks: shortlisting. Longer where a panel has to convene.

One to two weeks: selection. A proper process for headship takes a day or two, plus scheduling.

Two to four weeks: references and checks. Full safer recruitment, taken up directly. This can’t be compressed and it’s frequently slower than boards expect, particularly over holidays.

One to two terms: notice period. This is the big one, and it’s outside your control entirely.

The process itself is eight to twelve weeks. The notice period is what turns it into two terms.

Where do boards actually lose time?

Rarely in the stages above. Almost always in four places.

Deciding what they want. A board that can’t agree whether it needs a headteacher, an executive head or a head of school under a group structure will spend six weeks on that question before writing anything. Resolve it first.

Convening the panel. Where a governing body or trustee board has to meet to agree a process, agree a shortlist and then interview, that’s three sets of diaries. Delegating to a small panel with authority to act saves weeks.

References in August. Referees on leave will hold an appointment up for a fortnight. Plan around it.

The round that doesn’t work. This is the largest hidden cost. A weak field means either appointing badly or starting again, and starting again adds a full term because you’ve usually missed the next resignation deadline.

That last point is why boards should plan for the possibility from the outset rather than treating it as a failure when it happens.

Can it be done faster?

Some of it, and it’s worth knowing which parts.

What you can compress: preparation, if you’re organised and have a small panel with delegated authority. Shortlisting, with the right people available. Scheduling, by fixing the dates before you advertise.

What you shouldn’t compress: the advertising window, because a two week window loses you the strongest candidates. The selection process, because a rushed appointment costs years. And the checks, which are not negotiable at any speed.

What you can’t compress at all: the notice period. However urgent your situation, a candidate in post elsewhere leaves when their contract permits.

Where speed genuinely matters, executive search can shorten the front end, because someone is actively approaching suitable people rather than waiting to see who applies. It doesn’t shorten the notice period either.

The honest planning assumption

Plan for a permanent appointment starting in two terms, and cover the interim period properly.

That isn’t pessimism, it’s arithmetic, and boards that accept it early make far better decisions than boards that hope for one term and improvise when it doesn’t happen.

It also changes the interim question. A board planning for a term will under-commission cover and then extend under pressure. A board planning for two terms briefs properly and appoints someone who can actually deliver something in that time.

And build in the possibility of a second round. If your first round produces no viable candidate, you want that to be a planned contingency rather than a crisis in June.

What actually shortens it

Three things reliably save weeks, and none of them involve cutting corners.

Fix the dates before you advertise. Closing date, shortlisting date, selection dates, all agreed and in diaries before the advert goes out. Boards that schedule as they go lose a fortnight to availability.

Give a small panel authority to act. Three people with delegated power to shortlist and appoint within agreed parameters will move at three times the pace of a full board.

Start the reference process at shortlisting. With the candidate’s consent, requesting references before final interview rather than after removes two weeks from the end, which is exactly where the pressure sits.

What doesn’t shorten it is shortening the advertising window, which costs you the candidates who are currently employed, or compressing the selection, which is where the actual decision quality comes from.

From our experience

The boards that recruit well are the ones that separated the two decisions.

Decision one: how do we cover the school properly for the next two or three terms? Decision two: how do we appoint the right permanent head, without pressure?

Boards that treat those as one decision end up compressing the recruitment because the cover is uncomfortable. Boards that solve the cover properly can then take the time to appoint well.

Many proprietors tell us the appointment they regret was the one made to end an uncomfortable period. In specialist settings, where a weak headship appointment can cost you staff, commissioners and a regulatory outcome, that’s an expensive way to buy relief.

We also see boards lose a month simply because nobody had authority to act between meetings. One agenda item delegating the process to a panel of three would have prevented it.

A common misconception

“We can fill this by September if we start in the spring.”

Sometimes, and only if you start early in the spring rather than late.

For a candidate on standard maintained sector terms, a September start requires them to resign by 30 April. That means your process has to be finished and the offer made before the end of April, which means advertising in early February at the latest.

A board that starts in April is not recruiting for September. They’re recruiting for January, whether they’ve realised it or not.

Knowing that early lets you plan the cover properly. Discovering it in June means a term of improvisation that the children in your school experience as another period without settled leadership.

Questions for boards and proprietors

• Have we agreed what kind of role we’re appointing to, before writing the advert?
• Does a small panel have authority to act between board meetings?
• Have we planned the cover for two terms rather than one?
• What will we do if this round doesn’t produce a viable candidate?
• Are we compressing the process because the interim period is uncomfortable?

Our perspective

Two terms is the honest answer, and boards that accept it plan better than boards that hope for less.

Resolve the role first. Delegate to a panel that can act. Advertise properly and don’t compress the parts that protect the quality of the appointment. Cover the school properly meanwhile, so you aren’t recruiting under pressure. And plan for the possibility of a second round from the start.

Every school’s circumstances are different, but the boards that appoint well are the ones who gave themselves the time to. That appointment will shape the experience of every child in the school for years, which is a good reason not to make it in a hurry.