Abstract
Purposes. The purposes of this study were (1) to determine the perceived effective and ineffective administrative behaviors of the superintendent of schools and how these behaviors affect cabinet members in the performance of their job-related duties; (2) to determine if cabinet members' perceptions of the superintendent's administrative behaviors vary according to administrative function, number of years served as member of superintendent's cabinet; average daily attendance of the school district; size of suprintendent's cabinet; whether superintendent is from inside or outside the district; ethnicity of superintendent; gender of superintendent, and number of years superintendent has served in this capacity. Method. The method employed was a questionnaire involving the critical incident technique which was mailed to superintendents' cabinet members of all school districts in Los Angeles County with a central office staff. Of a target population of 280, there were 121 usable responses. Respondents were asked to write brief, objective, specific descriptions of their respective superintendents' behavior, how each type of incident affected their performance in job-related duties, and how each type of incident affected their performance in job-related duties, and recommendations for improvement of perceived ineffective behavior. The researcher read critical incidents for a description of a fundamental or key behavior, summarized each, and grouped them in nine categories of effective behavior and seven of ineffective. Each category was then analyzed by 32 different variables and reported in frequency distribution and rank order comparison. The recommendations were read and grouped, resulting in eight categories. Results. Initiation of change and innovation by the superintendent was the most frequently identified effective administrative behavior; ineffective communication was the most fequently cited ineffective behavior. The most important recommendation for improvement of the superintendent's ineffective administrative behavior was to work more effectively with cabinet members. Respondents reported overwhelmingly that effective administrative behavior of their superintendent affected their own job performance "positively" (79 of 83). Two each reported "no effect" and "negative effect." Almost all cabinet members (49 of 53) reported that their superintendent's ineffective behavior had a "negative effect" on their job-related performance, but 4 stated "no effect." Since this study encompassed only a single county, recommendations for its replication and/or of segments of it were made. In order to assist future researchers all data were carefully tabulated in the appendix.