Abstract
M. Ed. (Education Management)
The problem of the exercisinq of authority by the headmaster, is twofold in nature. Firstly, many headmasters seem to be in doubt as to the limits of their authority. Secondly, the
way in which the headmaster exercises his authority, has an effect on the motivation and work satisfaction of the staff and the pupils.
Formal line authority is delegated to the headmaster in order to carry out the responsibilities concerning his post. This authority includes executive and legislative functions. The legislative function is related to the competence of the headmaster to create internal order in the school by the formulation and implementation of a school policy and rules. School policy and rules must be compatible with the government policy regarding educational affairs and must satisfy the requirements of law enforcement and legal practice. Headmasters' uncertainty about the extent and limitations of their formal authority is the result of the magnitude of statutory stipulations and prescriptions contained in official educational policy. Many headmasters also lack knowledge of law enforcement and legal practice. The dynamic nature of an authority relationship brought about by delegation, can also lead to the headmasters' uncertainty about the limits of their authority.
Informal authority can be invested in the headmaster by the staff and the pupils, on account of their respect for and confidence in the headmaster. Two types of informal authority are identified: authority of competence and personal authority. It is of vital importance for the headmaster to achieve a high standard of informal authority, as the effective application of his formal authority is dependent on the quality of his
informal authority.