It is that time of year again. Across international schools, leaders are posting job adverts, speaking with recruitment agencies and mapping out staffing needs for the next academic year.
It’s a time fraught with urgency, pressure and an uncomfortable truth: recruitment remains one of the most time-consuming and emotionally draining aspects of school leadership.
Every principal knows the challenge: how do you secure exceptional teachers in an increasingly competitive global market, where the cost of living, salary bands, visa conditions and expectations vary wildly from country to country?
Related: Browse thousands of teacher vacancies on Vlog Jobs.
The hidden cost of teacher recruitment
The time investment alone is staggering. Even before safer recruitment checks, police clearances, reference validation and safeguarding protocols, the interview process itself is absorbing.
Schools distribute the work as best they can; HR may filter applications, heads of department shortlist candidates, senior leaders manage panels, but the cumulative time burden remains heavy.
Yet the real weight of recruitment is not simply logistical. It is emotional. And it is most keenly felt in rejection. Not the rejection we give (although telling an enthusiastic teacher they were unsuccessful is never pleasant), but the rejection when a candidate turns us down.
That moment, after weeks of interviewing and planning, when the preferred candidate replies with a familiar sentence - “I’ve decided to accept another offer” - is hugely disappointing.
Too often, though, the rejection is not due to professional alignment or school culture, it’s because we waited to be transparent about information such as salary, benefits, family support, housing and other fundamentals that were hidden in a process designed in another era.
By the time those realities are revealed, trust is eroded and candidates feel misled.
Flipping the script in school hiring
This is why at Kinabalu International School (KIS) in Malaysia, we decided to take a different approach. Two years ago, we turned our recruitment process upside down. Instead of building connection first and clarity second, we chose to put both clarity and connection first.
Now, while our process begins much like any other - candidates submit a CV and cover letter - after that, it diverges sharply.
Firstly, we longlist generously. If someone shows potential, we speak to them. Not after three stages, but at the start. Every longlisted candidate spends 20 to 30 minutes in conversation with me personally, as principal.
I share an honest summary of our school: our strengths, our development priorities, our constraints, our location and the reality of life at KIS. Then I ask: “Why are you considering leaving your current school, and what kind of school environment are you looking for next?”
Inviting questions from candidates
From that point, I hand control to the candidate and invite questions. Any questions.
I have been asked about professional development opportunities, pastoral priorities and safeguarding culture. I have been asked about how good the coffee on campus is, what the structure of the week is and how “nice” our parents are. Anything is welcome.
Questions are not a test of seriousness; they are a test of trust. When candidates realise that nothing is off-limits, the tone changes. The interview becomes a conversation, not an interrogation.
As part of this conversation, I also share our full salary and benefits. Right there, everything on the table. Housing allowance, cost of living, dependent policy, health insurance, taxation, mobilisation and demobilisation allowances - the full financial and contractual picture.
If a candidate wishes to withdraw, good. If a candidate wishes to continue, even better! Because from that moment, both parties are operating in good faith. If we choose to progress to a second round, there is genuine mutual intent. If we offer a role, the candidate will not suddenly decline based on salary or package shock. They know what to expect.
The result of changing recruitment
The impact has been striking. Our rate of candidate withdrawal at offer stage has decreased dramatically. Wasted interview time has fallen. Most importantly, the calibre of cultural fit has increased.
Our process takes up more of my time. It demands more from me as a principal, especially early in the cycle. But that investment of leadership time has proven invaluable.
Candidates who withdraw do so early and respectfully. Many send emails thanking us for our honesty. Quite a few return to reapply the following year.
And here is something that surprised me: candidates who initially believed salary was their primary motivator realised during the conversation that it was not. Teachers want enough to live and save, but what truly drives them is purpose.
They want to work where they believe in the leadership, feel aligned with values and know they will be trusted as professionals. When we stopped trying to have candidates “sell themselves” and started telling the truth about the school, things changed.
My challenge to school leaders is simple. If we genuinely believe teachers are our most valuable asset, then we must lead recruitment with the same values we claim to model elsewhere and ask of our very own pupils. Be honest. Be upfront. Tell the truth. Share the limitations as openly as the strengths.
Don’t delay the conversation that matters most.
Sam Gipson is the principal at Kinabalu International School in Malaysia
You can now get the UK’s most-trusted source of education news in a mobile app. Get Vlog magazine on and on
