This article is a report of results of an investigation in which urban public school principals received instruction from school psychology consultants in time management as a basis for increasing time spent supervising classroom and remedial teachers. Nine principals received 9 hr (three 3-hr sessions) of instruction in a three-phase time management approach: (a) time management problem analysis, (b) plan development and implementation, and (c) plan evaluation. Results indicated that all principals increased time spent in instructional supervision following time management program participation. In addition, the investigation revealed that classroom and remedial teachers indicated greater supervision satisfaction following principals' participation in the program. Also, it was found that the nine principals could apply the time management approach following the program, based on monthly time management plans submitted to respective consultants, and that principals from other school districts rated the instructional package as potentially beneficial to colleagues and themselves. Limitations of the investigation are discussed, relevance to school psychology practice is considered, and research directions are noted.Research on organizational leadership has indicated that a distinguishing characteristic of the effective administrator is frequent and direct daily staff contact (Gilbert, 1978;Grove, 1983). Moreover, research has suggested that, in schools with above average student achievement and staff productivity, principals spend more time in instructional supervision than do counterparts in lower achieving, less productive schools (Brookover, Beady, Flood, Schweitzer, & Wisenbaker, 1979). Concerns have been expressed by principals and other administrators that daily work time limitations preclude utilization of exemplary administrative practices . In particular, school principals have explained that outside factors, especially central office personnel and federal and state regulations, have placed demands on them that do not allow ample time for supervisory activity (Boyer, 1983;Huberman & Miles, 1985). In this regard, it has been argued that schools (and other environments, particularly business and industry) are systems in which time cannot be allotted to priority activities (Fullan, 1982;Louis, Rosenblum, & Molitor, 1981).