A lot of my work recently has focused on strategy, impact, usage, and technical delivery of IT within Education.
As I reflect on how schools are adapting to new challenges, I came to a conclusion: the traditional Network Manager role is no longer sustainable in its current form.
This may not be a new realisation for everyone, but there are still many in the sector operating with this title and structure – whether in local authority maintained schools or trusts without a centralised IT function. The role itself is a legacy of a previous model, and we are now at a tipping point where it needs to evolve.
What I am not saying
I am not suggesting that those in Network Manager roles are not capable or effective. Many are highly skilled and experienced. The issue is not the individual, but the expectation – it is no longer realistic for one person to deliver everything the traditional role has historically covered.
That scope often includes hardware maintenance, software deployment and management, budget planning, strategic direction, and team leadership. Expecting a single individual to operate effectively across all of these areas is increasingly impractical.
Nor am I suggesting that traditional technician roles are no longer needed. There will always be a requirement for onsite support and hands-on technical work, and it remains a valuable entry point into edtech. However, the assumption that this role naturally progresses into a single, all-encompassing Network Manager position no longer reflects reality.
By moving away from reliance on a single individual and instead enabling specialisation, we create more sustainable structures. This also helps retain talent within education, aligning more closely with wider industry, where specialist roles are the norm rather than the exception.
A more effective pathway is to allow individuals to start in technician roles, gain broad exposure, then develop into a chosen specialism – ultimately progressing into leadership within that area should they wish. This combines practical, on-the-ground experience with deeper expertise, strengthening both the individual and the wider team.
It also allows those entering the profession with specialised academic backgrounds to apply and develop those skills, rather than being forced into overly generalist roles.
Cloud Adoption has brought this front and center
The network manager role of old, did exactly what the title says, manage the network and everything on it, interacting with it – and support all those using it.
But as we know – this is no longer the way things should be working.
The removal of on-premise, however gradual, leads to a shift away from the traditional management of systems, and delivery of support.
With the adoption of cloud platforms and technology, the configuration and management of these is often a lot more standardised and a lot less specific for each site. There is also less local control, with updates to platforms managed centrally by others. Systems are also reduced in number and there is no longer a need to keep outdated software working.
It’s not simpler, but it is different—and in a cloud-first environment, it becomes much easier to separate responsibilities across roles.
The need for specialists
In my experience, there has always been a need for specialists. Expecting one person to cover the full range of responsibilities required in modern IT support is not realistic, and has not been for some time.
Whenever I speak to leaders, I am asked how they can hold people to account within such a broad role, that they have limited knowledge of. This is a direct result of the broad nature of the Network Manager role. It becomes difficult to manage, deliver, or progress when there is no clear visibility of what is happening or why.
This is particularly evident when progression is based on technical competence alone. Moving from a technician role into second line, or into a Network Manager position, is often treated as a natural step. In reality, these roles demand different skillsets. Promoting someone purely because they are a strong technician, or due to length of service, risks setting them up to struggle in a role that requires broader strategic, operational, and leadership capabilities.
If you ask most technicians or Network Managers, they will identify areas of the role they enjoy and areas they do not. As platforms grow in scale and complexity, there is increasing value in allowing individuals to focus on areas of interest and develop deeper expertise.
This does not mean creating single points of failure. Effective specialisation relies on strong documentation, clear processes, and active knowledge sharing across a team. When managed correctly, expertise becomes a shared asset rather than a risk.
With platforms such as Microsoft 365, Google Workspace, and Jamf, the level of depth required is significant. These systems are complex, continuously evolving, and have wide-reaching impact across security, compliance, user experience, and long-term planning. Managing them effectively is a full-time responsibility in itself.
Concerns about knowledge being concentrated in individuals are often rooted in past experience, where systems were highly bespoke and poorly documented. In a well-structured environment, supported by clear processes and documentation, this risk is reduced. Specialists can be replaced or scaled as needed without introducing instability.
It is also important to recognise that specialism is not limited to technical expertise. Effective support is a service. It requires communication, empathy, and the ability to manage user experience under pressure. A specialist in customer service or user engagement can be just as critical as a technical expert.
While AI is increasingly capable of handling elements of first-line support, particularly around triage and routine queries, it lacks the contextual awareness required to fully understand the impact of decisions and changes. That level of judgement, particularly in complex school environments, remains a human responsibility.
The reality on the ground
Schools are under constant pressure to reduce costs. In some cases, centralisation is seen purely as a way to reduce headcount -fewer Network Managers, fewer on-site technicians.
However, this often becomes a numbers exercise rather than a structural redesign. Insufficient attention is given to how the new team should operate, what skills are required, and how responsibilities should be defined.
This is sometimes driven by internal promotions into trust-wide roles, where individuals may not yet have experience operating at that scale. It can also reflect a broader lack of understanding at leadership level of the complexity involved in managing a multi-school environment.
The result is unclear roles and blurred responsibilities. Individuals are stretched across multiple functions -managing cyber security while also providing on-site support, or being expected to deliver strategic direction while handling day-to-day operational issues.
This is not sustainable.
The need for clearly defined roles and specialist functions is now unavoidable. These can sit within a central team, be delivered through an MSP, or be a hybrid of both—but in all cases, boundaries and responsibilities must be explicit.
We are increasingly seeing this reflected in tenders for trust-wide support, where there is a clear expectation of both operational delivery and specialist capability across areas such as MIS, infrastructure, cyber security, user training, and strategy.
This is not a new model. Before the rise of MATs, many local authorities operated centralised IT support teams built around specialisation. MSPs continue to deliver this model today, making specialist expertise accessible to schools of all sizes.
The idea that a single individual can manage every aspect of a modern IT environment is not only outdated – it has already been replaced elsewhere. The challenge now is ensuring education leadership recognises and adapts to that shift.
The opportunity now is not just to replace an outdated role, but to build a model of support that is more resilient, more scalable, and ultimately better aligned to the needs of modern education.
