Abstract This cross-sectional survey study investigated middle and high school administrative team members’ leadership classifications and perceptions of secondary principals’ leadership actions and behaviors in the context of change and to what extent these perceptions are gender specific. In addition to gender, the study also examined the impact of race/ethnicity, age, campus level, length of employment in the district, length of time working with the principal, and closeness to the principals on leadership actions and behaviors. The results of the study are intended to highlight the importance and value of feminine-inspired leadership approaches and administrative team members’ perspectives of leadership in managing and leading the change process. The study targeted the leadership actions and behaviors of 39 middle school and 28 high school principals assigned to traditional secondary schools in the southwestern United States. Administrative team members’ perceptions of secondary school principals’ approaches to leadership served as the basis for the study, which investigated whether administrative team members perceived principals’ leadership actions or behaviors in a change context to be gender specific. Male and female administrative team members (n=210) were surveyed using the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire (LBDQ), Form XII – fourth revision (Ohio State University, 1962). Based on survey results, secondary principals were classified as dynamic, considerate, passive, and structured leaders as rated by administrative team members using the LBDQ. The results of the study revealed that gender and school level of administrative team members did not influence the classification of secondary principals as dynamic, considerate, passive, or structured leaders. The ratings of those principals perceived as dynamic were statistically significantly higher than those of principals as passive and structured leaders. Out of 62 secondary principals, administrative team members classified principals as follows: dynamic leaders 63% (n=39), considerate leaders 5% (n=3), passive leaders 16% (n=10) and structured leaders 16% (n=10). Additionally, dynamic leaders received a statistically significant higher rating of closeness to principal when compared to passive and structured leaders. The findings of the study, which illuminate the perspectives of administrative team members with regard to secondary school principals, have implications for informing research on school leadership as well as educational leadership practices.