COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT PREFERENCES AND ADMINISTRATIVE STYLES OF PUBLIC SCHOOL PRINCIPALS
This study sought to determine the relationship between administrative styles of unionized public school principals and their collective agreement preferences. The eight administrative styles were: autocrat, benevolent autocrat, bureaucrat, compromiser, deserter, developer, executive and missionary. Eighteen most common provisions culled from union contracts were used in eliciting the preferences of the principals of the Council of Administrators and Supervisors, Local 12, AFSA, AFL-CIO. This study also attempted to determine the distributions of the responses of the principals classified according to their administrative styles. In addition, this study sought to determine whether significant differences existed between the means of the responses of the principals classified according to less and more effective administrative styles with respect to their collective agreement preferences. Finally, this study attempted to determine whether any significant relationships existed between the collective agreement preferences of the principals and the following variables: designation of school building, student enrollment of the building, number of professional staff, socio-economic status of the student body, and student enrollment of the school district.^ The subjects of this study included 166 principals of whom six were found to be autocrats; 11 were found to be benevolent autocrats; ten were found to be bureaucrats; nine were found to be compromisers; four were found to be deserters; 19 were found to be developers; 25 were found to be executives; and 72 were found to be missionaries. The materials employed in this study included the Educational Administrative Style Diagnosis Test which was developed by Reddin and Reddin (1975), and the Inventory of Collective Agreement Preferences of School Principals (ICAP) developed by the investigator. The ICAP was designed to elicit the preferences of principals with regard to the 18 collective agreement provisions. The procedures employed in the study included Problem Development, Instrument Selection and Development, Selection of the Sample, Collection and Scoring of Data and Statistical Procedures.^ The following findings and conclusions seemed justified: (1) The principals' primary contract concern was for the provisions of salary, pension and retirement, sick leave and job security. (2) In accordance with Perlman's economic welfare theory of unionism, as well as Simon's theory of organizational membership, the principals indicated their concern for collective agreement, regardless of their administrative styles. (3) In accordance with Herzberg's motivational hygiene theory, the principals attached at least considerable importance to all collective agreement provisions, regardless of their administrative styles. (4) All parts of the collective agreement were of considerable importance to principals of every administrative style, with Fringe Benefits, Part A, and Salary, Part D, considered to be most important. (5) Principals grouped according to less effective styles attached more importance to their collective agreement preferences than principals grouped according to more effective styles. (6) How the principals responded to one provision or part of a collective agreement was related to how the principals responded to the other provisions or parts. (7) The principals perceived the collective agreement as an integrated unit. (8) In general the variables of designation of school building, student enrollment of the building, number of professional staff, socio-economic status of the student body and student enrollment of the district were independent of the responses of the principals with respect to their collective agreement preferences or parts. (9) The high degree of congruence between the administrative styles of the principals and their collective agreement preferences conformed with Reddin's 3-D Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. ^
GLADSTONE, DENNIS ARTHUR, "COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT PREFERENCES AND ADMINISTRATIVE STYLES OF PUBLIC SCHOOL PRINCIPALS" (1980). ETD Collection for Fordham University. AAI8020985.