The leadership job that’s getting harder to fill
Hiring a superintendent isn’t like hiring for most roles in a school system. The superintendent sits at the center of strategy, community expectations, board relations, staffing, budgets, and—more than ever—high-stakes accountability. When a superintendent vacancy opens, school boards and state leaders face a high-pressure challenge: find a qualified leader who actually wants the job.
That “actually wants the job” part is the sticking point. A large body of education research has explored superintendent turnover, job satisfaction, and equity in hiring. But there has been far less research asking a very practical question: how attractive is the superintendent role to the people most likely to be next in line?
A Kentucky-based study titled Superintendent Recruitment: A Statewide Assessment of Principal Attraction to the Job tackled that question directly by surveying practicing principals—the most common stepping-stone into the superintendency.
Why principals are the key “pipeline” for superintendent hiring
If you want to understand the future supply of superintendents, you look at principals. In a national study cited by the researchers, nearly all newly hired superintendents had prior principal experience across elementary, middle, or high school levels. In other words, principals aren’t just a possible pipeline—they are the pipeline.
This matters even more in the context of large-scale retirements among the “baby boom” generation and in states operating under intense accountability systems. Kentucky, for example, had been engaged in systemic reform for years under KERA (the Kentucky Education Reform Act), which increased the visibility and pressure on both principals and superintendents.
What the study set out to measure (in plain English)
The researchers surveyed 587 Kentucky principals (a 58.8% response rate). The survey asked about:
- Likelihood of pursuing a superintendent job (from “not at all likely” to “very likely”)
- Perceived capability to become a superintendent (a self-efficacy measure)
- Job satisfaction across 20 job facets in their current principal role
- Expected satisfaction with those same facets if they became superintendent
- Superintendent certification status (earned, not earned, or intent to earn)
Under the hood, the study is grounded in three well-established frameworks:
- Recruitment theory: what characteristics and job attributes make people more willing to apply?
- Job satisfaction theory: attraction rises when people expect satisfaction in the role
- Self-efficacy theory: people pursue roles they believe they can succeed in
The headline finding: most principals were not interested
On a 5-point scale, principals reported an average likelihood of pursuing the superintendency of 2.0. Even more telling: 68.1% said they were either “not at all likely” or only “somewhat likely” to pursue the job.
Certification patterns reinforced the same story:
- 87.7% of principals were not superintendent certified
- Among those not certified, 79.0% did not intend to become certified
In short, the pool of “ready and willing” future superintendent candidates looked thin.
What looks better as a superintendent (the incentives)
The study compared principals’ current satisfaction with what they expected as superintendents. Several facets were rated as more satisfying in the superintendent role, suggesting potential selling points for recruitment:
- Salary
- Extra-service pay and summer income
- Hours worked per year (interestingly, expected to be better)
- How district policies are implemented (more influence)
- Recognition for doing a good job
These are practical levers. They point to messaging and role design that highlight compensation, influence, and professional recognition—especially for candidates motivated by system-level impact.
What looks worse as a superintendent (the disincentives)
Other facets were rated as more satisfying in the principal role, which may discourage principals from moving up:
- Opportunity to use talents
- Work climate
- Sense of achievement
- Job security (a major concern)
- Opportunity to advance career
- Opportunity to serve others
That “job security” piece stands out. Superintendents often face contract instability, political pressure, and board turnover. If principals believe the superintendent role is less secure, many will rationally avoid it—especially if they already feel effective and valued where they are.
The “neutral” zone: time and family wasn’t the differentiator you might expect
Eight facets showed no meaningful difference between current and expected satisfaction, including vacation time, time with family, hours worked per week, and effect on spouse. This doesn’t mean work-life balance is easy in either role—it suggests principals may already view both jobs as demanding in similar ways.
What predicts real movement toward the role?
The study didn’t stop at opinions. It examined predictors of two important outcomes:
- Whether a principal earned superintendent certification (a concrete career step)
- How likely they said they were to pursue a superintendent job (job attraction)
1) Certification: who actually takes the step?
Three factors strongly predicted whether someone had earned superintendent certification:
- Likelihood of pursuing the job (not surprisingly)
- Feeling capable of becoming a superintendent (self-efficacy)
- Current satisfaction with time/family (those more satisfied here were less likely to be certified)
That last point is easy to overlook but important: if principals feel their current role fits their family life well, they may avoid additional coursework, credentialing, or a job they perceive as more consuming.
2) Attraction: what predicts interest in pursuing the superintendency?
In the regression analysis, three personal characteristics did most of the heavy lifting:
- Age: older principals were less likely to pursue the job
- Certification: having the credential was associated with higher pursuit likelihood
- Perceived capability: feeling capable strongly increased pursuit likelihood
Job facet expectations (like intrinsic satisfaction and time/family) mattered statistically, but the practical impact was small compared to those three variables.
So what should districts do with this information?
Even though this study focused on Kentucky, the themes travel well: the superintendent role is high-impact, high-pressure, and not broadly appealing to many principals. If districts want stronger applicant pools, they can’t rely on hope and last-minute searches.
Action ideas for strengthening the superintendent pipeline
- Start earlier with younger leaders: age was the strongest predictor of reduced interest, so leadership development needs to begin well before “late career.”
- Build self-efficacy on purpose: confidence in capability predicted attraction. Mentorship, stretch assignments, and shadowing can make the role feel achievable instead of mysterious.
- Use realistic job previews (RJPs): the study highlights RJPs as a proven recruitment tool—showing both the positives and negatives of the role, plus how successful superintendents cope with the hard parts.
- Address job security fears directly: candidates may need clearer information about superintendent tenure patterns, board relationships, and supports that reduce “political whiplash.”
- Review certification experiences: one interpretation raised by the researchers is that learning more about the job could reduce attraction for some candidates. Programs may need to pair realism with skill-building and support so realism doesn’t become discouragement.
- Expand diversity in the pipeline: the principal pool in this study was overwhelmingly White. If the pipeline lacks diversity, superintendent candidate pools will too—unless districts invest in intentional leadership pathways.
A quick TinyEYE takeaway: leadership stability supports student support systems
At TinyEYE, we work with schools to deliver online therapy services that help students thrive. While our work is student-centered, studies like this one matter because leadership stability influences everything from staffing decisions to service continuity. When superintendent recruitment is difficult—or turnover is high—district initiatives can stall, including programs that support student well-being.
Strengthening leadership pipelines is not just a governance issue. It’s a capacity issue that touches instruction, special education, and the broader student support ecosystem.
For more information, please follow this link.
