Purpose This study explores the tensions and opportunities that arise when public schools are subordinated to dual governance structures. It also analyses the coping strategies employed by school leaders to manage conflicts and optimize resource allocation within their institutions. Design/Methodology/Approach Data were collected through semi-structured interviews conducted with seven school principals, three heads of local education authority (LEA) education departments and three Ministry of Education (MOE) superintendents. Findings The interviewees identified several disadvantages associated with subordination to dual hierarchies. These include school leaders’ increased workload and time constraints, a heightened bureaucratic burden and overlapping responsibilities, the need to meet political rather than professional considerations and the challenge of reconciling external perceptions and values that may conflict with their own. School leaders also mentioned several advantages of this dual subordination, highlighting the richness of services offered by both the MOE and the LEA, as well as the comprehensiveness and better alignment of these services with the specific needs of their schools. The analysis revealed three strategies school principals employ to navigate the complexities of dual subordination to both the MOE and the LEA: collaborative communication, acting as intermediaries and bypassing officials. Originality/Value In contrast to prior scholarship that underscores the risks inherent in subordination to dual hierarchies, our findings indicate that domesticated organizations such as public schools that have secure funding, exhibit reduced susceptibility to the disadvantages typically associated with such structural arrangements. Instead, they demonstrate a greater capacity to harness the benefits of dual hierarchies to advance their organizational interests.
Nir et al. (Thu,) studied this question.