George Scouten, LL’ 17, Upper School Head and Assistant Head of School, Heathwood Hall Episcopal School (SC)
It was just last year that Richard Thaler won the Nobel Prize for his study of behavioral economics, but it’s been a full decade since the publication of Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein’s Nudge, which first popularized the concept of Nudge Theory. Since that time, interest in Nudge Theory has continued to gain traction and has been applied in a variety of organizational settings from schools to businesses to government agencies.
So what is Nudge Theory? And, more importantly, how can Nudge Theory enhance our understanding of leadership development inspired by the gcLi philosophy? In a nutshell, Nudge Theory contends that “small and apparently insignificant details can have major impacts on people’s behavior.” How environments are arranged can serve the effect of encouraging people to choose one path over another—without actually limiting an individual’s ability to choose the alternative path. As Thaler and Sunstein present it, a nudge is “any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people’s behavior in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives.”
Anyone who is responsible “for organizing the context in which people make decisions” is what Thaler and Sunstein name a “Choice architect.” Examples of choice architecture are abundant: just think about the arrangement of the ballot the next time you go to vote, or consider the default settings on your 403(b) plan or on your new iPhone. Even the way in which food is presented in your local grocery store or school cafeteria has the effect of influencing choices.
It’s easy to see how everyone working at a school—teachers, coaches, administrators, grounds crew, and dining staff—all have the capacity to be choice architects. Landscaping that encourages walking a certain route instead of another, classroom arrangements that facilitate discussion, annual fund appeals that suggest just slightly higher donations than recipients were likely thinking about—all of these are examples of nudges within a school setting. It should be noted that nudges involve neither overt incentives nor explicit punishments. So, for example, a classroom organized so that the teacher may see everyone’s laptop screen, or writing the honor pledge on the top of every assignment, or an assignment whose answers are not easily Googled would all be examples of nudges that make it easier for students to choose academic honesty. By contrast, a requirement that everyone abide by the honor code or an academic penalty for cheating would not be considered nudges (though they could still certainly be appropriate), since they go beyond merely smoothing the way for a particular choice.
As is likely clear by now, proponents of Nudge Theory tend to believe that, in general, people should be free to do what they like—but also that it is “legitimate for choice architects to try to influence people’s behavior [. . .] in ways that will make the choosers better off, as judged by themselves.”
Again, most schools will want to continue to have hard and fast rules (and consequences for breaking those rules) in certain areas; however, independent schools need to give students the opportunity to make their own choices. Indeed, this is central to developing student leadership, and this is where nudge theory is particularly illuminating.
Set Expectations: When I was in high school, I was senior class president, but in spite of my elected position, I was never encouraged to innovate to make the school or community a better place; it was the adults’ job to run the school.
By contrast, in my current role, I don’t have a single meeting with prospective students that fails to ask, “How will you make the school a better place if you come here?” I want to nudge prospective students into shaping the life of the school. Even discipline cases end with the question, “How can you make the school better moving forward?” Setting the bar high—and articulating that the business of shaping the school is a joint activity—is the first step in nudging young people toward behaving like leaders.
Consider Questions of Space: We also need to give students easy access to those adults who can help them facilitate their ideas. One of the major ways that we’ve sought to facilitate student leadership is through the arrangement of physical space. For example, we moved our Dean of Students into a new office directly off the main congregation area for students. Similarly, I have positioned my desk in such a way that it is right in front of the door to my office, which allows me to be easily visible to anyone passing by and to call out to students I want to flag down. My hope is that the student who might be hesitant to talk to me about his or her ideas may have one more impediment to that conversation removed—and my hope is that by engaging easily in banter about minor things, students may more readily come to me with more significant problems or proposals.
Create Opportunities: Another physical cue that visually signifies to students their role in the running of the school involves our Monday Morning Meetings, a gathering of the entire Upper School. Students run the meeting, and teachers and administrators sit among the students or stand at the back. In the first half of the year, the meetings are led by elected senior class officers, and in the Spring, students from other age groups are given opportunities to lead. Finally, throughout the year, any student is invited to make announcements or report on club or athletic news.
Celebrate Leadership—especially when it comes from unexpected quarters: Having facilitated a culture that encourages student leadership, it’s important to celebrate student accomplishments—especially when those examples come from outside the “recognized” leaders of the school. I not only recognize such individuals in the “Shout-Outs” section of my weekly letter, but I also make a point to thank those who spurred a particular idea or activity. We also encourage students to recognize their peers for accomplishments when they have played a significant role in a project’s genesis or implementation.
Everything matters—that’s the crux of Nudge Theory. When we use our words and our environment to pave the way for young people to choose to take on leadership—with all its attendant risks—then we are helping them practice skills that will make them better in the long run and our communities better right now.
George Scouten is the Upper School Head and Assistant Head of School at Heathwood Hall Episcopal School, a PreK-12, co-ed, day school in Columbia, SC, where he is also a parent of three boys and the middle school lacrosse coach. George is a 2017 graduate of the gcLi Summer Leadership Lab as well as a 2015 graduate of the NAIS Aspiring Heads Program. He earned his Ph.D. in Literature and Rhetoric from the University of South Carolina.