a comparison of academic and non- academic staff perceptions of higher education changes using a...
DESCRIPTION
ATEM QLD May 26, Foci Loss of human relations values felt more acutely by non-academic staff Academic staff and non-academic staff numbers – balance and imbalanceTRANSCRIPT
A comparison of academic and non-A comparison of academic and non-academic staff perceptions of higher academic staff perceptions of higher
education changes using a competing education changes using a competing values framework: A question of balancevalues framework: A question of balance
Don Sanderson Queensland University of Technology
Vivaldi: The Four Seasons (from The Trial Between Harmony & Invention)
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 2
Overview of Presentation“Kites & Compasses”“Kites & Compasses”
• Focus of presentation • Methodology• Results• Discussion
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 3
Foci
• Loss of human relations values felt more acutely by non-academic staff
• Academic staff and non-academic staff numbers – balance and imbalance
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 4
Change and higher education
• Corporatisation• Losses and gains
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 5
‘Them and us’• “When the literature on
higher education draws on such work, it generally contrasts administrators’ and professionals’ different bases of authority (position versus expertise) and aims of control (accountability versus autonomy)” … and the danger is that administrators can be cast as ‘villains’”
(Rhoades & Slaughter, 1991, p. 189).
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 6
An untenable polemic
• Polemic is too simplistic. • It is more likely that organisational
participants operate in dual or multiple capacities, across value structures or paradigms.
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 7
Methodology
• Methoda. Triangulationb. Participantsc. Limitations
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 8
Interview participants (n = 12)
Code Primary
Role Secondary
Role Sex Length of
Service Status
Ac1 Academic Female Long-serving +20 years Full-time
Ac2 Academic Male Long-serving +20 years Full-time
Ac3 Academic Female Long-serving +20 years Full-time
Ac4 Academic Female Short-serving + 5 years Full-time
Ac5 Academic Male Long-serving +20 years Full-time
Ac6 Academic Male Short-serving + 5 years Full-time
Ac7 Academic Male Medium + 10 years Full-time
N-Ac1 Manager Academic (research)
Female Medium + 10 years Full-time
N-Ac2 Administrator Student (part-time)
Male Short + 5 years Full-time
N-Ac3 Manager Male Long-serving + 20 years Full-time
N-Ac4 Manager Academic (research)
Female Medium + 10 years Full-time
N-Ac5 Administrator Female Medium + 10 years Full-time
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 9
The Competing Values Framework (CVF)
Human Relations Model Ends: Cohesion Morale Means: Training Dev. Of human resources Internal Focus
F l e x i b i l i t y
Open Systems Model Ends: Growth, resources acquisition, external support Means: Adaptability Readiness
Ends: Stability Control Means: Information management Communication Internal Process Model
C o n t r o l
External Focus Ends: Productivity Efficiency Means: Planning Goal-setting Rational Goal Model
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 10
Human Relations Model Means: Development of human resources (1) LR: Mentor – (4);Facilitator (1) IR: Higher morale (1); Higher levels of leader credibility (1) MIS: Computer –aided instruction (4); Interpersonal communicating and conferencing (7) MIS-SC: User controllability (12) Terms: Family (2); Collegial (3) Internal Focus
F l e x i b i l i t y
Open Systems Model IE: Innovation and Change (9); Change (10) Ends: Growth (1), Resource acquisition (7); External support (5) Means: Adaptability (1); Readiness (1) LR: Innovator (6); Broker (9) S: Non-routine task technology (8) IR: Higher morale (1); Higher levels of leader credibility (1) MIS: Inter-organisational linking (3) MIS-SC: Ad hoc (3) Terms: Entrepreneurial (1)
Means: Information management (7); Communication (2) LR: Monitor (2) S: Vertical coordination (4) IR: Lower morale (22); Lower levels of leadership credibility (1); Higher levels of conflict (24); More resistance to change (5) MIS: Internal monitoring (12); Internal controlling (2); Record keeping (13) MIS-SC: Standardised (3) GDP: Data-based process (10) Terms: Bureaucratic (6); Top-down (1) Internal Process Model
C o n t r o l
External Focus Ends: Productivity (5); Efficiency (6) Means: Planning (1); Goal-setting (1) LR: Producer (4); Director (1) IR: Lower morale (22); Lower levels of leadership credibility (1); Higher levels of conflict (24); More resistance to change (5) GDP: Goal-centred process (1) Terms: Driven (2); Quality (4) Rational Goal Model
All interviewees mapped onto CVF matrix according to frequencies
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 11
Quadrant strength by attribute frequency: Both groups
Group
HRM quadrant
by attribute
frequency
OSM quadrant
by attribute
frequency
IPM quadrant
by attribute
frequency
RGM quadrant
by attribute
frequency Academic
(n = 7) 15
(7.31%) 35
(17.07%) 86
(41.95%) 69
(33.65%) Non-
Academic (n = 5)
14 (15.56%)
30 (33.34%)
34.5 (38.34%)
11.5 (12.78%)
Total (n = 12)
29 (11.43%)
65 (25.2%)
120.5 (40.14%)
80.5 (23.21%)
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 12
Academic and Non-Academic groups - Interviews
Org. A Org. B
Org. C Org. D
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Academic Non-Academic
IPM RGM
HRM OSM
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 13
Survey results
Respondent groups rating by culture type
Respondent group
Org A (HRM)
Org B (OSM)
Org C (IPM)
Org D (RGM)
Academics (n = 28)
23.47 20.3 24.12 32.1
Non-Academic (n = 15)
13.31 25.8 27.36 33.53
All Respondents (n = 43)
18.29 23.05 25.75 32.82
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 14
Academic and Non-Academic groups - Survey
Org. A Org. B
Org. C Org. D
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Academics: Non-Academics:
HRM OSM
IPM RGM
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 15
Comparison between Interview and Survey Academics
Org. A Org. B
Org. C Org. D
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
HRM OSM
IPM
RGM
Interview Academics: Survey Academics Combined groups:
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 16
Comparison between Interview and Survey Non-Academics
Org. A Org. B
Org. C Org. D
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
HRM OSM
IPM
RGM
Interview Non-Academics: Survey Non-Academics Combined Groups:
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 17
Comparison of Academic and Non-Academic groups: Model strength
Org. A Org. B
Org. C Org. D
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Academics Non-Academics
HRM
RGM
OSM
IPM
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 18
All respondents
Org. A Org. B
Org. C Org. D
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Human Relations
Model. ‘Irresponsible country club’
Internal Process Model.
‘Frozen bureaucracy’
Rational Goal Model.
‘Oppressive sweat shop’
Corporate-collegial
Corporate-mercantile
Open Systems Model.
‘Tumultuous anarchy’
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 19
Ohio State University Extension
Org. A Org. B
Org. C Org. D
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Human Relations Model (HRM)
Open Systems Model (OSM)
Internal Process Model (IPM)
Rational Goal Model (RGM)
S
N
W E
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 20
Point 2. Balancing numbers
• Study research • Case study• Other organisations
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 21
Research
• Halfond reports that in the US over the period 1975 to 1990,
• “EEOC figures show, student enrollment has risen 10 percent and the number of full-time faculty members has increased 21 percent. Administrative positions, however, increased 45 percent”.
• Source: Halfond, 1991, p. 17
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 22
Other government-funded organisations
• Department of Family Services 2004: 52% of the staff were involved in field work while 48% were involved in non-field activities
• Queensland Health 2005: 47.34% in clinical duties, with 52.66% in non-clinical duties
• CMC (2004, p. 149) RECOMMENDATION 5.5 That the current regional structure used by the Department of Families be critically reviewed, with a view to improving the ratio of direct service delivery staff to management and administration staff.
• Reason: The ratio of management and administrative staff to direct service delivery staff is unsatisfactory. The current regional structure appears unwieldy and may be contributing to an imbalance between frontline staff and management/administrative positions.
• Sources: Crime and Misconduct Commission, 2004; Queensland Health, 2005
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 23
Case study figures
• From 1991 to 2004 the study’s university saw its student numbers grow by 18.21%, with an increase of 10.66% in academic staff and 15.62% in general staff in terms of actual bodies
• Or an increase of 12.92% for equivalent full time (EFT) students, 13.29% EFT academics and 14.96% in EFT general staff.
• In 2005: 41.12% academic and 58.88% non-academic
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 24
Comparison of government-funded organisations – by staff percentages
Comparison of Government-funded Organisations
41.12
58.88
52 47.34
48 52.66
0102030405060708090
100
Dept FamilyServices 2004
Q Health 2005 Case Study 2005
Organisation
Perc
enta
ge
Field
Non-Field
ATEM QLD May 26, 2006 25
Case Study: Balance between Academic and Non-Academic staff
numbers 1976 - 2005Staff Percentages since 1976
43.23 43.13 45.2 41.12
56.77 56.87 54.8 58.88
0102030405060708090
100
1976 1986 1996 2005
Year
Pece
ntag
e
Academic
Non-Academic
Thankyou
Any questions?