The central problem in this investigation was to explore antecedent factors associated with role conflict and role ambiguity in the office of the school superintendent. A review of the literature and related studies indicated a paucity of research which related the concepts of (a) personality and (b) organizational variables to the level of (a) role conflict and (b) role ambiguity in the office of the school superintendency.

The design treated the personality and organizational variables as independent and the role conflict and role ambiguity variables as dependent. There were 8 personality variables and 15 organizational variables (a) 6 for organizational innovation, (b) 2 for administrative autonomy, (c) 1 for the position, (d) 3 for contextual factors, and (e) 3 for job satisfaction. The 25 variables were translated into operational definitions, and scales were constructed for each of them. Personality was operationalized by the Gordon Personal Profile, and Inventory. These were then used in a correlational analysis to explain the personality and organizational dimensions found.

The study used a self-rating questionnaire methodology. The sample population, selected through a systematic sampling procedure, consisted of 366 school superintendents from the Southeastern Region of the United States. There was 296 usable returns on the questionnaire designed for the study. This represented an 80.87% response rate. The Gordon Personal Profile, and Inventory had 279 responses completed according to the directions.

The data indicated the following:

1. There was no relationship between (a) role conflict or (b) role ambiguity and the personality variables.

2. There was no relationship between (a) role conflict or (b) role ambiguity and the organizational innovation variables.

3. There was a moderate, positive relationship between role conflict and the administrative autonomy variable of the question that the school system is under too much pressure from outside sources to determine its own course of action.

4. There was a weak, inverse relationship between role conflict and the administrative autonomy variable of the question that the school system is able to determine its own course of action.

5. There was no relationship between role ambiguity and the administrative autonomy variables.

6.There was no relationship between (a) role conflict or (b) role ambiguity and the position variable.

1. There was no relationship between (a) role conflict or {b) role ambiguity and the contextual factors.

2. There was a weak, positive relationship between role conflict and the job satisfaction variable of the likelihood of leaving their positions.

3. There was a weak, inverse relationship between role conflict and the job satisfaction variable of satisfaction with their present positions.

4. There was no relationship between role conflict and the job satisfaction variable of years in office.

5. There was no relationship between role ambiguity and the job satisfaction variables.

The administrative autonomy variable of the school system is under too much pressure from outside sources to determine its own course of action accounted for the largest proportion of variance in role conflict. The highest proportion of variance in role ambiguity was accounted for by the administrative autonomy variable of the school system is able to determine its own course of action.

Role conflict and role ambiguity in all cases were more directly related to organizational variables than to personality variables. However, the organizational variables did not explain as large an amount of variance in role ambiguity as they did in role conflict. The relationships between (a) role conflict and personality variables, (b) role ambiguity and personality variables, (c) role conflict and organizational variables, and (d} role ambiguity and organizational variables were not affected by partialling out individually the job satisfaction variables.