I'll compare this dilemma to a business setting. In such a setting, a supervisor is usually responsible for eight to ten employees. At this ratio, of manager to worker, there is ample time to observe, evaluate, and work with employees to raise them to the next level. In a school building, the administrator is the manager of, at the minimum, 30-40 employees. There is just not adequate time to do the necessary observing, and coaching with this amount of staff.
I believe this poses a conflict of what is seen as urgent vs. important. By this, I think it is important to have ample time devoted to leading your staff. However, there are always more urgent issues that leave the administrator unable to support and lead his staff. This is when having a strong staff under you becomes very important. I think a good, seasoned staff will realize the demands that an administrator faces on a daily basis and will, in turn, do their personal best each day and appreciate what time the principal can give to them as a group and as individuals.
There will always be the few staff members who will not be able to comprehend why they are not given more support from their leader. In these cases, it will be important for the principal to provide other sources of support for these teachers. Grouping the less experienced or frustrated teachers with peers that have more experience would be one way to help in this situation. Henry Ford once said, “All problems are personnel problems.” I have to agree with this. In today's educational arena, any problem the school faces will ultimately affect the personnel, and that may be the most complex problem for an administrator to solve.
