The head teacher says very plainly "I don't want to be the CEO of an Academy, I want to be a headteacher". I hope he, and the people like him manage to survive the changing system.
When you say you hope he survives the changing system, I hope he realises he can do so by being the headmaster of an academy.
I mean, smart CEOs worry about making enough money to invest in developing the product right? The 'product' of an academy is educated children (or adults, I suppose, if they stay through the sixth form) - so what's the problem?
The academy system just gives the head/governors more control to do what's right for that particular school.
Sure, some schools are so templated that there's little benefit to be had, but many are unique in a way in which those familiar with the school can manage better without having to abide by national or regional policies that aren't the best fit.
What it does do is allow fiscal autonomy and freedom from a bad local authority.
However where the school is working with a good local authority, there are very few advantages. Indeed staying in LA control provides tremendous advantages in terms of pooling of resources - IT support, curriculum support, HR and finance for example.
In this case the LA is well managed and supportive. Splitting away offers few benefits.
You say the 'product' is smart kids. The product of many academies is actually kids who score highly in metrics that can be measured, but don't have a great all-round education. Oh, and a big shiny car for the CEO.
Which then mean much much less than what they did in the 70s and 80s (due to "qualifications inflation").
And even the best of them (Phds and the like) can leave you with no job prospects.
When I describe the schools that I attended many of my acquaintances from other parts of the country react with surprise that my schools were all comprehensives yet had strict discipline (though not obsessed with uniform minutiae as many seem to be now), a strong work ethic, a lot of after school activities, etc., and they encouraged us to be ambitious and creative. Many of my acquaintances in contrast describe schools of the time that were just as bad as any horror story you see in the Daily Mail today.
My only knowledge of UK schools now is from the UK online press and if I didn't constantly remind myself that schools are not all the same I might easily believe their sweeping generalisations. Edit: lived in Norway for the last thirty years and all my children went to Norwegian schools.