THE LITERATURE ON COURT ADMINISTRATION IS CRITICIZED FOR ITS BIAS AND FOR ITS FAILURE TO RELATE TO RESEARCH IN JUDICIAL PROCESS AND OTHER ASPECTS OF POLITICAL SCIENCE. RESEARCHERS IN COURT ADMINISTRATION ARE URGED TO ABANDON THEIR 'BOOSTERISM' IN FAVOR OF SCIENTIFIC METHODS, TO EXAMINE THE WORK OF INNOVATION RESEARCHERS, AND TO CONSIDER THE COMPARISON OF COURT ADMINISTRATORS TO OTHER GROUPS IN ANALOGOUS POSITIONS. THE POLITICAL ANALYSIS ARGUES THAT MANY OF THE JUSTIFICATIONS GIVEN FOR HIRING PROFESSIONAL COURT ADMINISTRATORS (ELIMINATING DELAYS, PROMOTING INNOVATIVENESS, INTRODUCING AN APOLITICAL POSITION INTO COURT MANAGEMENT, PROVIDING TRAINED PROFESSIONALS TO PERFORM THE COMPLEX TASK OF COURT ADMINISTRATION) ARE NOT SUPPORTED BY EXISTING EMPIRICAL DATA ON THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM. IT IS FURTHER ARGUED THAT WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A COURT ADMINISTRATOR IS NOT OF PRIMARY IMPORTANCE IF ONE BELIEVES THAT THE MAIN POINT OF COURT REFORM IS THE PROMOTION OF EQUAL JUSTICE BEFORE THE LAW. IT IS POINTED OUT THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF COURT ADMINISTRATORS ARE FUNDAMENTALLY UNRELATED TO MANY OF THE SOURCES OF UNEQUAL JUSTICE, AND THAT REDUCING COURT DELAYS THROUGH EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION DOES NOT NECESSARILY SERVE THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE FOR INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS. IT IS ALSO SUGGESTED THAT THE HIRING OF COURT ADMINISTRATORS MAY REFLECT CERTAIN NARROW, PRIMARILY ECONOMIC INTERESTS (E.G., SAVING MONEY FOR CITY GOVERNMENTS, MAKING LAWYERS' WORK EASIER AND MORE PROFITABLE, OPENING NEW MARKETS FOR PRIVATE BUSINESS, ADVANCING THE STATUS OF PEOPLE INVOLVED IN COURT MANAGEMENT) THAT ARE NOT DISCUSSED IN THE LITERATURE. A BRIEF REVIEW OF THE HISTORY OF COURT REFORMS SUGGEST A POLITICAL EXPLANATION FOR THE EMPHASIS ON EFFICIENCY AS THE KEY TO SOLVING THE PROBLEMS OF THE COURTS. IT IS NOTED THAT EFFICIENCY IS NOT A VALUE-FREE PHENOMENON AND THAT THE ISSUE IN COURT REFORM IS REALLY EFFICIENCY FOR WHOM AND FOR WHAT ENDS. SEE ALSO NCJ-48466, 48468, AND 48469. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (LKM)