Files in this item
|(no description provided)|
|Title:||A Study of Bureaucratic, Collegial and Political Models of Governance in Six Universities in Taiwan|
|Author(s):||Chang, Clement Chien-Pang|
|Department / Program:||Education|
|Degree Granting Institution:||University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign|
|Abstract:||Six sample universities in Taiwan, Republic of China had been selected to test the prevalence of the bureaucratic, collegial, and political models of academic governance of higher education. The study analyzed decision-making processes of five hierarchical levels: trustees, president, deans, chairpersons, and faculty, on the three organizational dimensions, educational programs, personnel and budget. The relationship and interaction between the observed current behaviors and preferred situations affected by the six independent variables, sex, age, position, rank, unit affiliation, and length of service, was documented and analyzed. The influence of persons in five hierarchical levels was also studied and compared. The analysis focused on the three alternative models of governance in current practice and in preferred situations and the influence of the five hierarchical levels on the three organizational dimensions.
Not everyone in an organization perceives his or her role in current processes and in preferred situations through the same conceptual lenses. The models and metaphors used by "five-level-persons" of the universities may vary greatly as they make day-to-day decisions. However, once the decisions are made, they reflect perceptions of the university as an organization and roles within it. The extent to which participants perceive superiors, peers, and subordinates as bureaucrates, colleagues or politicians was measured. Behavioral patterns in current practice and in preferred situations evidenced by the data were compared with the processes operationally delineated for each of the three models. The data suggests that decision-making is based on universalisitic criteria and formal authority. For the most part the bureaucratic model was most evident. In situations where decision-making occurred through processes of consultation rather than recourse to formal authority, then the collegial model was evidenced. In those situations where decision-making was characterized by power differentiated among participants, then the political model was evidenced.
The study indicated that in current practice the bureaucratic model (81.25%) dominated most situations. By comparison, the collegial model (12.5%) and the political model (6.25%) were much less significant. In preferred situations, however, respondents supported the collegial model (56.25%) over the bureaucratic model (43.75%). Interestingly, Chinese academic communities do not welcome the political model either in current or preferred practices.
Perhaps one of the interesting aspects of the research was understanding the power structure of persons in the five hierarchical levels along the three dimensions. It was found that chairpersons are most influential on educational program issues. The influential levels in decending order for educational perceptions were chairpersons, president, deans, faculty and trustees. On personnel issues the levels of influence in decending order were president, chairpersons, deans, trustuees and faculty. On budget issues the levels of influence were president, deans, chairpersons, trustees and faculty.
Thesis (Educat.D.)--University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1981.
|Date Available in IDEALS:||2014-12-12|