T HE administrator in higher education is a victim of romantic myths told to the public in novels, motion pictures, and radio and television programs. There is the kindly old dean who has unlimited time for everyone, the cultured president who moves in the best social circles, and the faculty member with the lovely wife and the book-stocked office. The picture is one of comfortable contentmentfine buildings, eager students, well-kept grounds, and so on-and it is held up by an invisible administrative structure which is almost superfluous because, so the myths go, colleges and universities really run themselves. All that is necessary is a periodic injection of money. Although the myths have their greatest impact on the public at large, they have a continuing effect on the institutions themselves. Many of them are believed by trustees, faculty, and staff. Careful examination will reveal evidence that the popular image has affected organization and operation. For example, take note of the general feeling of suspicion the teaching faculty has for anything labeled administration. Of more significance is the distorted view many trustees have, not only of organization, but also of function-a distortion which in many cases grows out of a romanticized version of their own college experiences and encourages the tendency to administer present colleges and universities with the structure and procedures that were believed to be adequate in the I930's and the I940's. Some of the current literature on college administration, the office of the president, and the curriculum can be identified as dealing with the twentieth century, but one cannot be sure which decade. Modern higher education can no longer organize its administrative functions on the basis of an obsolete conception of campus life. Institutions of higher education today are large, complex, multi-purpose entities, which make increasing demands on financial, personnel, and material resources. If they are to meet the challenge of the immediate present and the foreseeable future, they must maximize the effectiveness of their operations. This can be done only by giving increased attention to control of planning and operations, activities that current administrative structure does not handle adequately. It is, therefore, imperative that every chief administrative officer seriously consider adding to his staff a planning-and-operations officer.