Once upon a time, someone somewhere said, “Schools should be run like a business.” What they probably meant was that schools should be more fiscally responsible—spending wisely, managing budgets effectively, and ensuring efficiency in operations. Instead, what we have now is an education system where CEOs—a title borrowed from the corporate world—sit at the top of sprawling multi-academy trusts (MATs), wielding executive power over schools as if they were running FTSE 100 companies.

But here’s the uncomfortable truth: schools are not businesses, and education should never be run like one. The rise of the “school CEO” is not only unnecessary but actively damaging to students, teachers, and the very purpose of education itself.

Education is Not a Business—It’s a Public Service

At its core, a business exists to generate profit. It measures success in financial terms—growth, market dominance, shareholder returns. A school, on the other hand, exists to educate and develop young people. It is a public service, designed to prepare students for life, not maximise profit margins.

Yet, the introduction of CEOs in education has blurred this distinction. Schools now mimic corporate structures, with executive teams, branding strategies, and marketing departments. Instead of prioritising teaching and learning, school leaders are increasingly preoccupied with expansion, mergers, and performance metrics—all hallmarks of a business, but not of a functioning education system.

Delusions of Grandeur: The Problem with School CEOs

Many of today’s school CEOs do not have the experience or expertise to justify their titles. Running an individual school as a headteacher is one thing, but overseeing a multi-million-pound organisation spread across multiple sites? That’s an entirely different skill set. Yet, in many MATs, former headteachers with little to no corporate leadership experience are suddenly handed CEO titles and control over dozens of schools.

The result? A leadership vacuum filled with buzzwords, ego, and misguided policies.

• School CEOs liken themselves to corporate bosses, but unlike actual business leaders, they do not face competition, market forces, or shareholder accountability.
• Instead of innovating education, they roll out restrictive policies, prioritising conformity over creativity.
• Rather than empowering schools, they impose rigid, centralised control, stripping individual headteachers of their autonomy.

And, of course, they command CEO-level salaries—often earning six-figure sums while schools under their leadership struggle to afford textbooks and basic resources.

The Business Model Doesn’t Work for Schools

The introduction of CEOs in education has encouraged an obsession with growth rather than quality. Just as businesses aim to expand, MATs have adopted the mindset that bigger is better—absorbing more and more schools into their chains, regardless of whether it benefits students.

This model comes with serious flaws:

1. Standardisation Over Local Needs

• In business, standardisation helps efficiency. But in schools, it leads to a one-size-fits-all approach that ignores the unique needs of students and communities.
• Schools that were once thriving under strong local leadership are now forced to adopt rigid, MAT-wide policies that make little sense in their specific contexts.

1. Data Over People

• Just like businesses obsess over financial reports, MATs fixate on exam results, attendance figures, and league tables—often at the expense of student wellbeing and teacher retention.
• Instead of investing in high-quality teaching, schools are pressured to manipulate data to meet targets, much like companies “massage the numbers” to please investors.

1. Profit-Driven Thinking Creeping In

• While state schools do not (yet) operate for profit, the introduction of private sector language and leadership structures has encouraged cost-cutting over investment.
• Schools are hiring fewer experienced teachers, reducing support staff, and cramming more students into classrooms—all to ensure “financial sustainability” rather than educational excellence.

What’s the Alternative?

Schools need strong leadership, but they do not need CEOs. The best school leaders are those who understand teaching and learning first, not business jargon and corporate strategy.

• Headteachers—not CEOs—should be empowered to lead their schools without excessive interference from centralised trusts.
• Education funding should be spent on students and staff, not inflated executive salaries.
• Schools should focus on developing well-rounded individuals, not just hitting corporate-style performance targets.

The “run schools like a business” experiment has failed. It has not improved education, but it has created bloated bureaucracies, detached leadership, and a culture where financial management is prioritised over student success.

If we truly care about education, we need to go back to what schools were meant to be: places of learning, led by educators, for the benefit of students—not corporate-style institutions serving the ambitions of careerist CEOs.