Problem: This study addressed the problem of why educational administrators within the Seventh-day Adventist system in Australia were not remaining longer than their positions. The approach taken was to address the area of job satisfaction and to examine facets or dimensions of the administrators’ work that they found satisfying or dissatisfying.

Method: This study used an instrument adapted from the one developed by Christesson-Marley (1983). The Seventh-day Adventist Educational Administrators Satisfaction Questionnaire was mailed to the entire population of forty-seven Adventist educational administrators in Australia. Forty-one questionnaires were returned. The data were analyzed using statistical methods appropriate to the seven research questions proposed by the study.

Results: The study revealed that, of the administrators surveyed, none were female. Of the five subgroups studied (i.e., education directors, secondary principals, junior secondary principals, vice principals, and primary principals), education directors perceived their jobs in a significantly different way than did the “in-school” administrators. Supervision was found to be the one dimension fiving satisfaction to all those surveyed. While none of the nine dimensions devised for the study were identified as causing dissatisfaction, other individual aspects were identifies, such as the lack of participation in union and division meetings; the imposed work load and its subsequent effect on home lives; the evaluation process; and the amount of stress and frustration associated with the job.

Conclusion: The study found that education directors perceived their jobs in significantly different ways than did the “in-school” administrators. The turnover rate for all administrators was high, as reflected in the fact that 3.8 years was the average length of stay at any one position. Supervision was found to cause satisfaction for all those studied. For principals, satisfaction was derived from the supervision of their subordinates, however, education directors became less satisfied the more they supervised and more satisfied as others supervised them. Areas of dissatisfaction for the ‘in-school’ administrators included, lack of involvement at union and division meetings, the evaluation process for administrators, the workloads, and the stress and frustration associated with the job. The education directors perceived none of the areas covered by the study as causing dissatisfaction. Two other significant findings were, first those administrators who were satisfied with their jobs planned to stay and make them a career. Second, “in-school” administrators perceived their education directors to be in reality out of touch with the real problems in the schools, and therefore of no real help to them.