Closing the Knowing-Doing Gap Through Better Systems
The knowing-doing gap is not a character flaw in teachers or principals. It is a systems problem.
Every school I work with has more than enough knowledge. Staff can describe the latest framework, name high yield strategies, and quote research about feedback, engagement, or questioning. Yet the daily classroom experience does not always reflect what people say they believe. That gap between what we know and what we consistently do is where improvement either stalls or accelerates.
Management research on the knowing-doing gap, especially the work of Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert Sutton, has shown that organizations rarely fail because they lack ideas. They fail when talk substitutes for action, when fear or internal competition makes experimentation risky, and when leaders measure everything except whether new practices are actually used. Schools face the same dynamics, just in a different setting.
Studies of teachers’ use of evidence-based practices point in the same direction. Self-efficacy, follow-up support, and the surrounding school systems are usually the decisive factors, not personal willpower.
| “In other words, the knowing-doing gap is an implementation problem, not a character problem.” |
A systems minded leader does not respond to this gap with another training or another checklist. Instead, they redesign the conditions that make it more likely that people will act on what they already know.
Below are eight guidelines for turning knowledge into collective action in your school.
1. Start with why, not how
“Why before how” is more than a slogan. It is the difference between compliance and commitment when we jump straight to treating new practices as technical tricks rather than a change in mindset.
A systems approach starts with clarifying the belief underneath the strategy. For example:
-
We use Learning Goals because we believe students deserve clarity about what success looks like.
-
We use Collaborative Pairs because we believe every student has the right to think out loud and test ideas.
When people are clear on the why, they can adapt the how without losing the center. When the why is missing, even a well-designed strategy will drift or disappear as soon as pressure increases.
Leader move: Before any new initiative or expectation, write one clear statement that connects the practice to your core promise for students. Make that statement visible in PD, PLCs, and walkthrough tools.
2. Treat doing as the path to knowing
We often behave as if understanding must come before action. In reality, the opposite is usually true. Understanding deepens through cycles of trying, reflecting, and teaching others how.
Behavior and implementation research calls this the intention behavior gap. Strong intentions only weakly predict actual use unless there is a concrete plan for when, where, and how the new practice will show up. Specific “first tests” dramatically increase the chance that something actually happens in classrooms.
The problem in many schools is that we wait for perfect clarity before we let teachers experiment. Perfection gets in the way of getting better. Staff leave a training convinced in principle, then wait for the “right time” or the “perfect lesson” to try something. That time never comes.
Leader move: Shrink the first step. Ask teams to choose one class period or one question set where they will try a new strategy within the next week, then debrief quickly in PLCs. Normalize small experiments instead of big launches.
3. Make action, not talk, your unit of progress
Action counts more than plans and concepts. The process of talking is often substituted for action.
Staff meetings, committees, and PLCs can create the illusion of progress. People feel busy and thoughtful, but few changes occur in classrooms. A systems minded leader watches for this pattern and gently shifts the metric:
-
From “Did we have a good discussion?” To “What will look different for students in the next two weeks?”
-
From “Do we agree this is important?” To “Where did we test this and what did we learn?”
Leader move: End every meeting with a simple check: “Name one specific action you will take, by when, and how we will know it happened.” Capture those actions and revisit them at the next meeting.
4. Decide how your system will respond to mistakes
There is no doing without mistakes. The real issue is not whether errors occur, but how the administrations respond when they do.
If teachers believe that trying a new practice will expose them to criticism or public comparison, they will play it safe. The knowing-doing gap widens not because people reject the strategy, but because the perceived risk of trying it is too high.
Leader move: When you see imperfect implementation, start by naming and affirming the attempt. Then focus feedback on “what is next” rather than what is wrong. Make it explicit that experimentation, not polish, is what you value in the first phase of implementation.
5. Actively remove fear from the system
Fear fosters knowing-doing gaps.
Fear shows up in subtle ways: performance labels, public scoreboards with no context, high-stakes observations with low feedback, or vague threats about test results. None of these makes people more likely to apply what they know. They make people more likely to retreat to familiar routines.
Implementation studies in schools repeatedly find that when data is used for learning rather than blame, staff are more willing to try new practices and stay with them long enough to see results. Reducing fear is not about lowering expectations. It is about making the path to those expectations visible and supported.
Leader moves:
-
Separate learning walks from evaluation. Use them to learn about the system, not to judge individuals.
-
Share patterns, not names, when you look at walkthrough or assessment data with staff.
-
Use language that frames data as information for improvement, not evidence for blame.
6. Replace internal competition with shared work
Beware of false analogies and unhelpful competition. The results of a common effort or shared goal are greater than those of individuals competing.
Ranking schools, teams, or teachers against each other can produce short-term score gains, but it usually deepens the knowing-doing gap. People guard resources, hide what is not working, and avoid candid conversations about practice.
A systems lens prioritizes collective efficacy instead of internal competition. The question shifts from “Who is winning?” to “What are we learning together about what works here?”
Leader move: Reframe data conversations around “our students” rather than “my class” or “your grade level.” Highlight examples where teams shared a strategy that lifted results for more than one group of students.
7. Measure what turns knowledge into action
Measure what matters and what can help turn knowledge into action.
If you only measure end-of-year outcomes, you will always be too late to close the knowing-doing gap. By the time you see the problem, you are already planning next year’s initiatives.
Systems minded leaders add process measures:
-
Are Learning Goals visible and referenced in most classrooms?
-
Are students getting multiple summarizing opportunities in every lesson?
-
Are questions that require higher order thinking showing up in walkthrough evidence, not just in plans?
Implementation science calls these “process measures” and treats them as essential. They tell you whether professional learning has actually changed practice before you wait for the end-of-year test scores.
These are not “nice to know” details. They are the levers that turn professional learning into daily practice.
Leader move: Choose one or two high yield strategies and track simple indicators over a short cycle of two or three weeks. Use that information to adjust support, not to label teachers.
For a deeper look at how to diagnose the right causes rather than reacting to surface-level symptoms, read School Improvement Needs a Mechanic’s Mindset and Here’s Why.
8. Let your calendar and budget tell the real story
What leaders do, how they spend their time, and how they allocate resources, matter.
People are watching where you show up and what you fund. If your stated priority is stronger feedback to students, but:
-
you rarely join PLCs where feedback work is happening
-
your walkthrough tools do not include feedback
-
your PD calendar is filled with unrelated topics
then the system is perfectly designed to keep the knowing doing gap in place.
Leader move: Align three visible levers with any priority practice: time on the calendar, space in meetings, and some portion of resources. Even small shifts signal that this is not another passing idea but part of how the school operates.
Reflection questions
You do not have to close every gap at once. Start by making the system visible. A few prompts you might use with yourself or your leadership team:
-
Where in our school do we see the biggest gap between what people say they believe and what consistently happens for students? What system conditions might be keeping that gap in place?
-
Which one of the eight guidelines, if we strengthened it over the next four to six weeks, would most quickly increase the odds that staff act on what they already know?
When leaders treat the knowing-doing gap as a systems design challenge, not a motivation problem, they unlock the capacity that already exists in their schools. Knowledge becomes less of a binder on the shelf and more of a daily promise to students.
Want help closing the gap in your school?
If you are already seeing your own school in this article, you need a structured way to look at your systems with your team, name the real knowing doing gaps, and design short cycles of action that move the work forward.
That is precisely why I wrote Making Progress. Bring this to your district, with your context and your people, and focus on:
-
applying the principles from Making Progress to your current initiatives
-
mapping the systems that are getting in the way
-
designing two or three short improvement cycles, your team can start immediately
-
developing better feedback systems
