The faculty-administrator relationship: partners in prospective governance?Abstract
In this article the authors examine characterizations of faculty-administrator relationships, in particular as related to shared governance. Two primary perspectives guided the study. The first perspective focused on the fragile nature of shared governance, characterized by a lack of harmony and mistrust. The second perspective focused on the root of faculty-administrator tension as both cultural and structural in nature. The study illuminates problems associated with shared governance, attributed primarily to the conflicting cultures within which faculty and administrators work. As well, the authors articulate a three dimentional frame including holistic descriptions, participant perceptions, and participant behaviors, which characterize the dynamics of faculty-administrator relationships. Dispositional contexts associated with these relationships are further examined.
The faculty-administrator relationship in colleges and universities is Central to the effectiveness of shared governance (Breslin, 2000; Guskin, 1996; Westmeyer, 1990). Yet, the literature on this important relationship and its implications for institutional governance is disjointed and haphazard hap·haz·ard
Dependent upon or characterized by mere chance. See Synonyms at chance.
Mere chance; fortuity.
By chance; casually. and has yet to be taken up by scholars in a serious way. One gets a general sense from the higher education higher education
Study beyond the level of secondary education. Institutions of higher education include not only colleges and universities but also professional schools in such fields as law, theology, medicine, business, music, and art. literature of a relationship that is at the very least challenging, and at the extreme is adversarial ad·ver·sar·i·al
Relating to or characteristic of an adversary; involving antagonistic elements: "the chasm between management and labor in this country, an often needlessly adversarial . . . and conflict-laden. This perception, to the extent that it represents reality, is problematic given the requirements of shared governance calling for "joint effort" and "inescapable interdependence in·ter·de·pen·dent
Mutually dependent: "Today, the mission of one institution can be accomplished only by recognizing that it lives in an interdependent world with conflicts and overlapping interests" " (American Association of University Professors American Association of University Professors (AAUP), organization of college and university teachers. It was founded (1915) for the purpose of defending faculty rights, most notably academic freedom and tenure (see tenure, in education). [AAUP AAUP
American Association of University Professors
AAUP n abbr (= American Association of University Professors) → asociación de profesores universitarios
AAUP ], 1966). We believe study of the faculty-administrator relationship is important in informing the burgeoning literature on governance and its effectiveness. This paper synthesizes what the governance literature tells us about this all-important relationship and advocates the necessity of its study as an independent line of inquiry.
The dynamics of the faculty-administrator relationship are important given that faculty and administrators hold very different views of how their institutions function (Bensimon, 1991; Blackburn & Lawrence, 1995; Peterson & White, 1992).The differences may be expected, but are worth noting given that academic administrators tend to have come to their positions from the faculty ranks (Blackburn & Lawrence, 1995; Cohen cohen
(Hebrew: “priest”) Jewish priest descended from Zadok (a descendant of Aaron), priest at the First Temple of Jerusalem. The biblical priesthood was hereditary and male. & March, 1974; Dill, 1991). However, once in an administrative post, the administrator is often viewed as being increasingly removed from central academic concerns, at least in the eyes of many faculty (Birnbaum, 1988). These groups therefore are marked by conflicting interests (Leslie, 2003) and values conflicts (Dill, 1991), and represent at best an uncomfortable alliance (Guffey & Rampp, 1998). In the past, faculty might avoid these challenges by opting not to participate. Increasing external pressures, including those for faculty accountability, are necessitating greater faculty participation in decisions that are impacting their welfare more than ever before. Increased use of part-time faculty for example, has put more pressure on tenure track faculty to participate in governance processes (Morphew, 1999). The challenges of fostering a climate valuing joint effort and the interdependent in·ter·de·pen·dent
Mutually dependent: "Today, the mission of one institution can be accomplished only by recognizing that it lives in an interdependent world with conflicts and overlapping interests" nature of faculty and administrator work can no longer be ignored.
Kezar and Eckel (2004) have pointed out that the scholarship on how Groups interact in the governance process is minimal. There has been a coinciding press for a comprehensive body of research on this topic becoming increasingly evident in recent calls for revitalized re·vi·tal·ize
tr.v. re·vi·tal·ized, re·vi·tal·iz·ing, re·vi·tal·iz·es
To impart new life or vigor to: plans to revitalize inner-city neighborhoods; tried to revitalize a flagging economy. governance systems (Benjamin & Caroll, 1993, 1998; Braskamp & Wergin, 1998; Chaffee, 1998; Greer, 1997; Gumport, 2000; LLawler Mohrman, 1996; Peterson & White, 1992; Rhoades, 1995; Schuster, Smith, Corak & Yamada, 1994; Tierney, 1998). At least some are calling for new paradigms New Paradigm
In the investing world, a totally new way of doing things that has a huge effect on business.
The word "paradigm" is defined as a pattern or model, and it has been used in science to refer to a theoretical framework. for thinking about governance. Greer speaks directly to a new type of governance needed as "prospective," or forward-looking and relationship-focused. Likewise, Rhoades (1995) advocates attention to "connection, common cause, and a broad sense of community" (p. 26). Additionally, Lazerson (1997) has argued that the days of the "pay me and leave me alone" mentality is long gone (p. 12). Institutions must begin to stimulate an ethos e·thos
The disposition, character, or fundamental values peculiar to a specific person, people, culture, or movement: "They cultivated a subversive alternative ethos" Anthony Burgess. that values the faculty-administrator partnership in decision-making (Del Favero, 2003). Further research is needed to inform higher education leaders how to best facilitate the kinds of "bridging activities" (Leslie, 2003, p. 27) that foster a relationship marked by joint effort, mutual respect, and trust.
The objectives of this research were threefold: (a) to synthesize To create a whole or complete unit from parts or components. See synthesis. existing knowledge of the faculty-administrator relationship in the context of academic governance; (b) to offer one approach to conceptualizing the relationship and its various dispositional contexts to advance its comprehensive study; and (c) to transcend the faculty bias often suggested in accounts of faculty-administrator interactions. This third objective is made possible in that we have ourselves occupied both scholarly and administrative roles in our careers. Consequently, we are in the unique position of understanding the perspectives of faculty as well as that of non-academic administrators who, absent the status of a scholar, must negotiate a level playing field See net neutrality. with respect to joint decision-making. In addition, the study informs broader purposes called for in recent examinations of governance in higher education Governance in higher education refers to the means by which higher educational (also tertiary or postsecondary) institutions are formally organized and managed, though often there is a distinction between definitions of management and governance. . For example, Kezar and Eckel (2004) assert the importance of framing governance scholarship in more meaningful ways, calling specifically for increased attention to the human dynamic. Stretching their point somewhat, this suggests to us that we ought to return to the traditional ethos of collegiality col·le·gi·al·i·ty
1. Shared power and authority vested among colleagues.
2. Roman Catholic Church The doctrine that bishops collectively share collegiate power. that was preeminent pre·em·i·nent or pre-em·i·nent
Superior to or notable above all others; outstanding. See Synonyms at dominant, noted.
[Middle English, from Latin prae prior to the rise of formal, more isolating and impersonal im·per·son·al
1. Lacking personality; not being a person: an impersonal force.
a. Showing no emotion or personality: an aloof, impersonal manner. decision-making structures. For this to be possible, we need to better understand the dynamic of the faculty-administrator relationship within a broad array of institutional decision-making contexts. Studies such as this one, intended to present a balanced view from both administrative and faculty perspectives, are useful in providing tools for further study of how the institutional decision-making environment in higher education can be improved.
Perspectives Guiding the Study
The purpose of this research was to examine characterizations of the Faculty-administrator relationship for purposes of conceptualizing it for empirical study. In so doing we will contribute to operationalization of the human dynamic (Kezar & Eckel, 2004; Tierney, 1998) of decision-making. Absent this knowledge, any attempts to further explore this relationship would have to be based on prevailing perceptions of how the two groups interact. We believe that a reliable understanding of the relationship must be based in the literature, since reliance on prevailing perceptions may result in a bias toward faculty views as the literature is historically biased toward faculty perspectives (Rice & Austin, 1988), and this bias continues to some extent. Recognizing that a prevailing bias exists, our objective here was to contribute to a more balanced understanding of issues and concerns on both sides. Two primary perspectives guided this study. First, while the partnership between faculty and administrators is essential to shared governance, it is also a fragile one, characterized by lack of harmony and large doses of mistrust. Thelin (2001) takes the impact of this lack of trust one step further in his metaphor of a "dry rot dry rot, fungus disease that attacks both softwood and hardwood timber. Destruction of the cellulose causes discoloration and eventual crumbling of the wood. " that is eroding a positive sense of campus community (p. 11). Indeed, cooperation between the two groups often is difficult to achieve (Birnbaum, 1988; Borland, 2003; Minor, 2004; Weingartner, 1996; Welsh & Metcalf, 2003). Welsh and Metcalf's study of Faculty and administrator support for institutional effectiveness activities underscored the absence of a "shared platform" (p. 445) for improving institutional performance.
Second, we have taken the perspective that the root of faculty-administrator tension is both cultural and structural in nature. This approach will be important in studying this topic as it will contribute to enhancing the explanatory power of the interaction by opening up an array of bodies of literature for consideration in a way that would not have been possible had we limited the contexts of tension to one or the other. Cultural differences in the academic and administrative worlds and their underlying values have been widely discussed in the literature (Baldridge, Curtis, Ecker, & Riley, 2000; Clark, 1987,1991; Dill, 1991; Etzioni, 2000). faculty highly value autonomy and the direction of their work is largely self-determined. The role of administrators on the other hand, is to serve the collective good requiring them to measure and weigh a multitude of interests. Influence is a tool widely used by administrators to build consensus while academics tend to believe it indecent, even immoral, to attempt to influence others (Dressel, 1981). Additionally, as subcultures
This is a list of subcultures. A
Structural limitations to a smooth functioning faculty-administrator relationship can be attributed at least in part to the professionalization pro·fes·sion·al·ize
tr.v. pro·fes·sion·al·ized, pro·fes·sion·al·iz·ing, pro·fes·sion·al·iz·es
To make professional.
pro·fes of administrative work and the advent of academic senates in the 1960s as a means of formalizing faculty participation in governance. These structural aspects of the organizational environment certainly can be seen as exacerbating ex·ac·er·bate
tr.v. ex·ac·er·bat·ed, ex·ac·er·bat·ing, ex·ac·er·bates
To increase the severity, violence, or bitterness of; aggravate: the already existing cultural differences in the two groups by widening the chasm between them. The resulting, often complex and misunderstood mis·un·der·stood
Past tense and past participle of misunderstand.
1. Incorrectly understood or interpreted.
2. decision-making structures (e.g., information systems, communication mechanisms, planning and resource management activities) frustrate participation (Birnbaum, 1988; Dressel, 1981), particularly by faculty whose focal interests, unlike administrators, are discipline--rather than institution-related.
Thus, while joint effort, mutual respect, and trust are hallmarks of the quality of shared governance systems being called for in the literature, consideration of those aspects of the governance relationship that broach broach (broch) a fine barbed instrument for dressing a tooth canal or extracting the pulp.
A dental instrument for removing the pulp of a tooth or exploring its canal. faculty participation has been woefully woe·ful also wo·ful
1. Affected by or full of woe; mournful.
2. Causing or involving woe.
3. Deplorably bad or wretched: deficient de·fi·cient
1. Lacking an essential quality or element.
2. Inadequate in amount or degree; insufficient.
a state of being in deficit. . Addressing this deficiency is paramount to well functioning governance systems. Yet we agree with Kezar and Eckel (2004) that current scholarship on how groups interact in the process of joint decision-making is inadequate. Following on Kezar and Eckel, this paper attempts to ignite scholarly attention to this vital aspect of governance.
Mode of Inquiry/Data Sources
Gumport (2000) brought attention to the need for alternative approaches to understanding the dynamics of change associated with higher education restructuring, while Tierney (2000) called for greater attention to the internal dynamic of governance processes. Our review of the literature suggested that a viable alternative for this study would be to focus more specifically on the human dynamic (Guffey & Rampp, 1998; Kezar & Eckel, 2004) as manifested in the relationship between faculty and administrators.
A review of shared governance literature was conducted as a way of gleaning Harvesting for free distribution to the needy, or for donation to a nonprofit organization for ultimate distribution to the needy, an agricultural crop that has been donated by the owner. how this relationship has been depicted de·pict
tr.v. de·pict·ed, de·pict·ing, de·picts
1. To represent in a picture or sculpture.
2. To represent in words; describe. See Synonyms at represent. and explained. The governance literature has been our initial focus since it is in the interest of institutional decision-making that faculty and administrators are called upon to interact. We began with Kezar and Eckel's (2004) review of the governance literature as a way of identifying key research on the topic. From there we examined other empirical, conceptual, and opinion literature to better understand the characteristics of the relationship, issues, differing values, and perceptions that most often caused tension and conflict, and how the tension/conflict is played out in some of the most common governance interactions.
The literature review focused on the following questions designed to explain not only what we know about this relationship but the prevailing views on what it needs to look like if governance systems are to be most effective into the future.
1. What collective interests and self-interests are evidenced in the interactions and how are they manifested? Differences in faculty and administrative cultures dictate that their values and preferences, and therefore what consumes their attention will vary. Specifically, faculty work is driven by self-interest while the efficiency focus of administrators demands that their work is system or institutionally focused. Understanding what interests motivate the interactions between these two groups will lay the foundation for understanding their divergent cultures and the concomitant difficulties associated with shared decision-making. 2. How is the faculty-administrator relationship characterized in the literature? This question is important given the often unsupported assumptions made by faculty in the literature used to critique the unacceptable actions or decisions of administrators. This question serves primarily a confirmatory purpose as it enabled us to construct a definitional foundation in the literature upon which further studies will build. 3. What kinds of interactions characterize the relationship? To understand the relationship per se, a focus on interactions is needed. This approach is consistent with recent calls for greater attention to the human dynamic of governance (Kezar & Eckel, 2004) and its internal dynamic (Tierney, 1998). Our intent at the beginning of the literature review was to make sense of these characterizations such that a tool for empirical study of its quality could be advanced. This study indeed suggests that the interactions between faculty and administrators can be depicted in two dimensions that might frame a range of positive and negative behaviors. 4. What are the functional contexts within which the relationship is enacted? While there is little agreement on the areas of faculty authority in decision-making (Minor, 2004), this question will guide future research by confirming the multitude of possible arenas within which joint decision-making occurs. This question serves a confirmatory purpose as well, and will guide the selection of additional bodies of literature for further study of the relationship.
Collective and Self-Interests
Problems associated with shared governance are commonly attributed primarily to the conflicting cultures within which faculty and administrators operate. The literature on academic organizations has demonstrated broad agreement regarding the existence of two widely divergent di·ver·gent
1. Drawing apart from a common point; diverging.
2. Departing from convention.
3. Differing from another: a divergent opinion.
4. cultures--academic and administrative (Becher, 1989; Birnbaum, 1988; Clark, 1987; Etzioni, 2000; Morphew, 1999; Westmeyer, 1990). A key differentiating characteristic of the two cultures is the primary focus or interest directing faculty and administrators in their work. According to according to
1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.
2. In keeping with: according to instructions.
3. Guffey and Rampp (1998), participants in shared governance are focused on their own respective agendas, a situation that complicates decision-making. Administrators are more commonly concerned with the collective. From the administrator's perspective, decisions made in the institutional interest most often take into account competitive interests vying vy·ing
Present participle of vie.
vying vie for their fair share of the spoils spoil
v. spoiled or spoilt , spoil·ing, spoils
a. To impair the value or quality of.
b. To damage irreparably; ruin.
2. . Resources are scarce. And, it is the job of administrators to fairly and effectively determine whose interests best match up with institutional objectives, and furthermore, who is most deserving de·serv·ing
Worthy, as of reward, praise, or aid.
de·serving·ly adv. . Their decision processes are obliged o·blige
v. o·bliged, o·blig·ing, o·blig·es
1. To constrain by physical, legal, social, or moral means.
2. take the collective into account.
The literature describing faculty work (Birnbaum, 1988; Clark, 1991; Dill, 1991; Etzioni, 2000; Morphew, 1999; Weingartner, 1996), on the other hand, presents the work of this group as less overarching o·ver·arch·ing
1. Forming an arch overhead or above: overarching branches.
2. Extending over or throughout: "I am not sure whether the missing ingredient . . . or institution focused and driven by more self-interested motives. They are concerned with obtaining resource support for their research, teaching, and service work, and may not be inclined to view the needs of others as equally, and certainly not as more, deserving. It is difficult for some faculty then to see beyond their own work and make judgments that will ultimately have the effect of disadvantaging their own program or individual support needs. Knowing this, any examination into the relationship between these two groups must recognize that they are motivated to engage with each other for very different reasons. Administrators are charged with handling matters of broad interest to the institutional community. The role of faculty is to conduct the academic functions of the institution, which means they are inexorably in·ex·o·ra·ble
Not capable of being persuaded by entreaty; relentless: an inexorable opponent; a feeling of inexorable doom. See Synonyms at inflexible. focused on teaching and research with the service component of their role often considered to play a tertiary tertiary (tûr`shēârē), in the Roman Catholic Church, member of a third order. The third orders are chiefly supplements of the friars—Franciscans (the most numerous), Dominicans, and Carmelites. role in institutional assessment of their work for promotion and tenure purposes. Consequently, participation in institutional decision-making activities often is considered a low priority activity for faculty.
Their divergent goals as a given, faculty and administrators often come to the joint decision-making context with varied and conflicting interests. To the extent that the parties to the relationship understand these interests, appeals to the interests of the other will be useful in the collaborative process. We believe that over the longer term, relationship building and maintenance will be less difficult, and trust and mutual respect more likely to develop where preferences and interests of collaborators are well considered in process interactions.
A primary interest of faculty on the other hand is autonomy or control over their own work (Birnbaum, 2003; Clark, 1987; Dill & Helm, 1988; Gumport, 2000; Keller, 2001; Leslie, 2003). Institutional actions viewed by faculty as hindering hin·der 1
v. hin·dered, hin·der·ing, hin·ders
1. To be or get in the way of.
2. To obstruct or delay the progress of.
v.intr. their freedom of inquiry, speech, or instructional control, can be vigorously opposed regardless of the positive impacts such a decision might have on the collective good. Additionally, Leslie (2003) cited class size, access to resources to support their work, and routes to publication as sources of faculty interest. Class size establishes in many cases the amount of effort involved in the teaching role. Where institutional type (e.g., research universities, liberal arts colleges It may never be fully completed or, depending on its its nature, it may be that it can never be completed. However, new and revised entries in the list are always welcome.
Liberal arts colleges , community colleges) dictates the extent to which teaching and research involvement must be prioritized, large classes often require that more time be spent on teaching. Resources and publication concerns are directly related to the research role, and represent for many faculty the primary criteria for productivity and associated rewards. These values are held close by faculty, many of whom would cite them as their reason for choosing the academic profession in the first place.
Contrary to the self-interested focus of faculty work (e.g., concern with individual productivity, publication, and excellence in one's teaching), administrators see their role as serving a collective interest (e.g., fair distribution of resources, advancing institutional visibility and public image, and generally improving institutional performance). Among their highly prized values is efficiency of institutional operation (Birnbaum, 1988, 2003; Etzioni, 2000). According to Birnbaum (2003) administrators are also bound to consider and respond to pressures from the external environment (e.g., rapidly changing technology, public demand for new programs, and most importantly Adv. 1. most importantly - above and beyond all other consideration; "above all, you must be independent"
above all, most especially , diminishing state and federal support) that makes the need for fundraising a critical one. The institution's public image is also an important concern of administrators (Leslie, 2003) since it dictates the kind and amount of support the public will provide. Taking a somewhat different view, Bai (2003) opines Opines are low molecular weight compounds found in plant crown gall tumors produced by the parasitic bacterium Agrobacterium. Opine biosynthesis is catalyzed by specific enzymes encoded by genes contained in a small segment of DNA (known as the T-DNA, for 'transfer DNA') that administrators are more concerned with their own careers and reputations, an assertion that we might expect to be true in many cases owing to owing to
Because of; on account of: I couldn't attend, owing to illness.
owing to prep → debido a, por causa de the fact that acting outside the regard for self-interest can be difficult for anyone. We do not mean to imply that faculty are selfish and administrators are magnanimous mag·nan·i·mous
1. Courageously noble in mind and heart.
2. Generous in forgiving; eschewing resentment or revenge; unselfish. . The implication here is that faculty focus on a specific field of research and historically were expected to maintain their focus there and let administrators run the institution and focus on links across disciplines. Shared governance has changed this dichotomous di·chot·o·mous
1. Divided or dividing into two parts or classifications.
2. Characterized by dichotomy.
di·chot view into a blended role in which institutional effectiveness and accountability is the bailiwick BAILIWICK. The district over which a sheriff has jurisdiction; it signifies also the same as county, the sheriff's bailiwick extending over the county.
2. of all. Where self-promoting motives drive administrative action within the faculty-administrator relationship, it is valuable when this is recognized and considered in attempts to build and strengthen the association. Indeed, while faculty have an interest in the financial viability of programs (O'Brien, 1998), such interest is most typically associated foremost with how that viability will enable support for their work and for that of their closest colleagues. Evaluating this attitude from the perspective of the collective, such a value is justified insofar in·so·far
To such an extent.
Adv. 1. insofar - to the degree or extent that; "insofar as it can be ascertained, the horse lung is comparable to that of man"; "so far as it is reasonably practical he should practice as it enables their highest and best contribution to the collective enterprise.
Birnbaum (2003) encapsulates the divergent priorities of the parties to higher education decision-making at somewhat of an abstract level similar to the AAUP Statement. Faculty are concerned with academic values, governing boards Noun 1. governing board - a board that manages the affairs of an institution
board - a committee having supervisory powers; "the board has seven members" are focused on responsiveness, and administrators make efficiency a priority. We would argue also that administrators are concerned as well with responsiveness insofar as they derive their authority from the Board and are charged with implementing policy at their behest be·hest
1. An authoritative command.
2. An urgent request: I called the office at the behest of my assistant. .
Varying interests also pertain per·tain
intr.v. per·tained, per·tain·ing, per·tains
1. To have reference; relate: evidence that pertains to the accident.
2. related to the conduct of the decision-making process. The academic training of faculty has prepared them to place a high value on argument as opposed to closure. Closure as an objective prevails for administrators. Birnbaum (2003) states the argument versus closure matter in terms of cultural values. Faculty culture values creativity, critical discourse, and the unfettered pursuit of knowledge. Here, compromise is of little value. Administrators, on the other hand, seek compromise as a way of reaching decisions where the differing perspectives of decision-makers must be bridged.
Characterizing the Relationship and Its Interactions
This section discusses the findings associated with the second and third research questions that focus respectively on how the relationship is characterized in the literature, and, the kinds of interactions that characterize the relationship. These results are combined given the lack of distinction in the literature between general relationship characteristics and characterizations of interactions. These characterizations fell into three main categories. First, there were descriptions that considered the overall character of the association between faculty and administrators. Second, there were perceptual per·cep·tu·al
Of, based on, or involving perception. characteristics that described an overall assessment of the attitudes, perceptions, and dispositions of one group toward the other. Lastly, the literature revealed descriptions of behaviors associated with the interactions between the two constituent groups. The following paragraphs will discuss each of these types of characterizations in turn. Table 1 provides a representative list of examples of characterizations of the faculty-administrator relationship in each of the three categories.
Characterizations were classified in three categories based on common characteristics of descriptions and how they integrated conceptually. First and most plentiful plen·ti·ful
1. Existing in great quantity or ample supply.
2. Providing or producing an abundance: a plentiful harvest. in the literature are what we term holistic descriptions. These descriptions less often rest on empirical research Noun 1. empirical research - an empirical search for knowledge
inquiry, research, enquiry - a search for knowledge; "their pottery deserves more research than it has received" and derive from knowledge about the bifurcation Bifurcation
A term used in finance that refers to a splitting of something into two separate pieces.
Generally, this term is used to refer to the splitting of a security into two separate pieces for the purpose of complex taxation advantages. of culture in academe. While sharing a home in academe, academic and administrative cultures are vastly different. Academics work in more autonomous contexts of teaching and research, and decisions about their work and performance are made with little regard for institutional concerns. Student learning and publication productivity drive their work. They devote scant scant
adj. scant·er, scant·est
1. Barely sufficient: paid scant attention to the lecture.
2. Falling short of a specific measure: a scant cup of sugar. attention to the collective needs of the institution that play little into the activities for which they are rewarded both psychically psy·chic
1. A person apparently responsive to psychic forces.
2. See medium.
adj. also psy·chi·cal
1. and materially. Administrators on the other hand, conduct their work in large part with the interests of some collective, if not the entire institution, in mind. Bureaucratic bu·reau·crat
1. An official of a bureaucracy.
2. An official who is rigidly devoted to the details of administrative procedure.
bu processes guide their decision-making and the needs of the collectivity demand their attention and energy. In sum, by necessity, faculty are typically concerned with institutional decision-making that will ultimately affect their own work and less concerned with administrative activity that does not. This cultural chasm defining the work of faculty on the one hand and administrators on the other, makes cooperation in the interest of shared governance difficult at best. Holistic descriptions of the faculty-administrator relationship derive from this cultural fragmentation (1) Storing data in non-contiguous areas on disk. As files are updated, new data are stored in available free space, which may not be contiguous. Fragmented files cause extra head movement, slowing disk accesses. A defragger program is used to rewrite and reorder all the files. , that is, the differences in the way administrators and faculty think of themselves and their work in relation to the institutional decision-making environment. For example, Guffey and Rampp (1998) describe the environment as one marked by turf struggles and a real potential for friction between faculty and administrators. Dill (1991) points to value conflicts that are inherent in the differing cultures of the two constituent groups. Thompson, Hawkes, and Avery (1969) believe that the different "truth strategies" subscribed to by the two groups is a source of latent hostility between them. Similar to scholars representing the divergent cultures as a source of fragmentation, Thompson, Hawkes, and Avery rely on the notion of pluralism pluralism, in philosophy, theory that considers the universe explicable in terms of many principles or composed of many ultimate substances. It describes no particular system and may be embodied in such opposed philosophical concepts as materialism and idealism. of truth strategies as the primary source of issues associated with faculty participation in institutional governance.
The second category that emerged was labeled participant perceptions. Characterizations in this group represented the perceptions of faculty or administrators with respect to their involvement in joint decision-making activities. In building a solid relationship, perceptions are important in that they offer a starting point Noun 1. starting point - earliest limiting point
terminus a quo
commencement, get-go, offset, outset, showtime, starting time, beginning, start, kickoff, first - the time at which something is supposed to begin; "they got an early start"; "she knew from the for collaboration and joint effort. Where perceptions are positive the assumption is that collaborative effort will be subjected to fewer hurdles; alternatively where perceptions of the other are negative, this represents an obstacle to be overcome before productive interactions can occur. Such negative perceptions can also foster attitudes that permeate permeate /per·me·ate/ (-at?)
1. to penetrate or pass through, as through a filter.
2. the constituents of a solution or suspension that pass through a filter.
v. through decision-making and relational contexts to create a culture that impedes productive interactions between the two groups. Miller (2003), for example, opined that administrators lack respect for faculty. Conversely con·verse 1
intr.v. con·versed, con·vers·ing, con·vers·es
1. To engage in a spoken exchange of thoughts, ideas, or feelings; talk. See Synonyms at speak.
2. , faculty have been described as suspicious of administrators (Kissler, 1997) and find them to be overbearing o·ver·bear·ing
1. Domineering in manner; arrogant: an overbearing person. See Synonyms at dictatorial.
2. Overwhelming in power or significance; predominant. and overpowering o·ver·pow·er·ing
So strong as to be overwhelming: an overpowering need for solitude.
o (Carlisle & Miller, 1998).
The last category of descriptions focuses on participant behaviors. These descriptions are more likely to have been derived from empirical observation as they identify specific behaviors engaged in by faculty and administrators. Such behaviors include placating pla·cate
tr.v. pla·cat·ed, pla·cat·ing, pla·cates
To allay the anger of, especially by making concessions; appease. See Synonyms at pacify. by either party (Miller, Williams Miller, William, 1782–1849, American sectarian leader, b. Pittsfield, Mass. He was the founder of the sect of Second Adventists, sometimes called Millerites. & Garavalia, 2003) as a way of indulging the other's whims, withholding Withholding
Any tax that is taken directly out of an individual's wages or other income before he or she receives the funds.
In other words, these funds are "withheld" from your wages. or misusing information (Guffey & Rampp, 1998), or displaying defensive reactions (Association of Governing Boards, 1996). Cooperative and collaborative behaviors are discussed in the literature more in the breach than in action, underscoring the challenges associated with joint decision-making involving faculty and administrators.
Overall, we conclude that much of the governance literature assumes the relationship is dysfunctional dys·func·tion also dis·func·tion
Abnormal or impaired functioning, especially of a bodily system or social group.
dys·func and conflict-prone, and this assumption has gone virtually unchallenged in studies of shared governance. While such a foundational premise has offered compelling commentary around the inadequacies of current decision-making paradigms, new approaches to relationship building should be informed by the more in-depth study enabled by the focus on interactions suggested here.
Dispositional Contexts Associated with the Faculty-Administrator Relationship
Our synthesis of perceptions and behaviors associated with the faculty administrator relationship suggests to us the notion of a grid of attitudes and dispositions that would adequately represent the range of possible relationships. As shown in Figure 1, the consideration of the relationship between faculty and administrators cannot occur by considering solely the relationship between the two groups as if they were monolithic Single object. Self contained. One unit. entities. For instance, as noted in a synthesis of empirical research by Braxton and Hargens (1996), faculty differ widely and often significantly in their approach to institutional concerns based upon their disciplinary focus. Disciplinarity is but one possible cause for faculty fragmentation. Faculty in social and physical sciences for example, are likely to have differing expectations for administrative behavior. These differences arise from the different behavioral norms associated with high and low consensus fields, represented respectively by the physical and social sciences. Demographics The attributes of people in a particular geographic area. Used for marketing purposes, population, ethnic origins, religion, spoken language, income and age range are examples of demographic data. and professional characteristics may also play a role in how faculty members expect administrators to behave and how they themselves interact with administrators (Bray, 2003); tenured ten·ured
Having tenure: tenured civil servants; tenured faculty.
Adj. 1. tenured and untenured faculty may expect different administrative supports, as may male and female faculty members. Informal social groups may also exist and exert influence. Simply put, given the necessity for faculty to specialize so heavily in a given field, there are numerous possibilities for fragmentation among faculty.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
We have, as a result, defined the possibilities for interactions along two axes axes
[L., Gr.] plural of axis. The straight lines which intersect at right angles and on which graphs are drawn. Usually the horizontal axis is the x-axis and the vertical one the y-axis. Called also axes of reference. as shown in Figure 1. The horizontal axis represents the relational attitude scale, while the vertical axis displays the faculty cohesion cohesion: see adhesion and cohesion.
The tendency of atoms or molecules to coalesce into extended condensed states. This tendency is practically universal. scale. The faculty-administrator relationship is ultimately played out in the contexts defined by the intersection of these two factors. The range of relationships for the horizontal scale shows a continuum from animosity and adversity ad·ver·si·ty
n. pl. ad·ver·si·ties
1. A state of hardship or affliction; misfortune.
2. A calamitous event. at the negative extreme (unilateral unilateral /uni·lat·er·al/ (-lat´er-al) affecting only one side.
On, having, or confined to only one side. effort) to mutual trust and respect at the positive extreme (joint effort). The central position represents one of neutrality. It is defined as neutral based on Birnbaum's (2003) condition of infrequent in·fre·quent
1. Not occurring regularly; occasional or rare: an infrequent guest.
2. interactions between members of the two groups as indicative of less compliance with organizational values. While our definition takes Birnbaum's condition to the extreme, it suffices in presenting an idealized i·de·al·ize
v. i·de·al·ized, i·de·al·iz·ing, i·de·al·iz·es
1. To regard as ideal.
2. To make or envision as ideal.
1. characterization for purposes of expressing the points on the continuum (i.e., no interaction, non-participation, or disregard for the relationship). The positive end of the continuum representing joint effort can be thought of as depicting the ideal working relationship. To the negative end of neutral, suspicion and deviance Conspicuous dissimilarity with, or variation from, customarily acceptable behavior.
Deviance implies a lack of compliance to societal norms, such as by engaging in activities that are frowned upon by society and frequently have legal sanctions as well, for example, the operate as hindrances to an effective relationship, but are seemingly less destructive than overt conflict and adversarial behaviors (the negative end point of the continuum) that often result in stalemates and delayed decision-making.
The vertical axis addresses the aforementioned a·fore·men·tioned
The one or ones mentioned previously.
Adj. 1. level of fragmentation Or cohesiveness that may exist within a given body of faculty members. Fragmentation can be perceived as taking several forms, while many could consider cohesion a precious if rare commodity. Given the evidence throughout many studies (Braxton & Hargens, 1996) that faculty vary across disciplines, it is vital to note that disciplinary differences may or may not be considered to be a source of fragmentation. Because disciplinary differences define the academic framework, that is, how institutions as a whole are able to forward knowledge through the process of specialization A career option pursued by some attorneys that entails the acquisition of detailed knowledge of, and proficiency in, a particular area of law.
As the law in the United States becomes increasingly complex and covers a greater number of subjects, more and more attorneys are , discipline indeed serves as a fragmenting force. Though having said that, there is still an essential piece to evaluating shared governance that involves an acknowledgement that faculty within disciplines are not homogeneous The same. Contrast with heterogeneous.
homogeneous - (Or "homogenous") Of uniform nature, similar in kind.
1. In the context of distributed systems, middleware makes heterogeneous systems appear as a homogeneous entity. For example see: interoperable network. . It is through their interactions with and in the relational environment that the fragmentation considered here becomes apparent. Faculty may differ strongly in their approval or disapproval of administrative methods. They may furthermore be at odds over the role of faculty in the process, or at loggerheads log·ger·head
1. A loggerhead turtle.
2. An iron tool consisting of a long handle with a bulbous end, used when heated to melt tar or warm liquids.
3. in considering the appropriate direction for the institution.
Our conceptual approach to understanding the faculty-administrator relationship combines the relational attitude and the faculty cohesion scales to provide dispositional contexts or models associated with faculty-administrator interactions. These contexts serve to define the environment and culture in which the two groups interact, and ultimately the behaviors characterizing interactions in a shared governance context. We construe construe v. to determine the meaning of the words of a written document, statute or legal decision, based upon rules of legal interpretation as well as normal meanings. from this grid described by the intersection of the two scales or dimensions, that the level of faculty cohesion and the prevailing relational attitude combine to foster a behavioral culture that corresponds to one of four models: Symbiotic symbiotic /sym·bi·ot·ic/ (sim?bi-ot´ik) associated in symbiosis; living together.
Of, resembling, or relating to symbiosis. Functioning, Wary Collaboration, Fractured Dissension, or Aggressive Discord Discord
See also Confusion.
demon of discord. [Occultism: Jobes, 93]
discord, apple of
caused conflict among goddesses; Trojan War ultimate result. [Gk. Myth. .
Symbiotic Functioning is the ideal shared governance environment. Symbiosis symbiosis (sĭmbēō`sĭs), the habitual living together of organisms of different species. The term is usually restricted to a dependent relationship that is beneficial to both participants (also called mutualism) but may be extended to is the circumstance in which two organisms live closely together in a Mutually beneficial Adj. 1. mutually beneficial - mutually dependent
dependent - relying on or requiring a person or thing for support, supply, or what is needed; "dependent children"; "dependent on moisture" manner. Symbiotic relationships This is an incomplete list of notable mutualistic symbiotic relationships, in which different species have a cooperative or mutually dependent relationship.
1 In analytic geometry, one of the four regions of the plane determined by two lines, the x-axis and the y-axis. of the grid, representing both high levels of trust from a positive attitudinal environment and a cohesive cohesive,
n the capability to cohere or stick together to form a mass. faculty, faculty and administrators are able to work together effectively and in mutual respect, negotiating strategies and policies that serve the institution and its individuals as well as possible. The point of reference for the joint effort described here is the spirit of cooperation as expressed in the AAUP Statement of Governance (1966). This statement sets forth the conditions under which shared governance can be expected to operate in higher education, and describes an "inescapable interdependence" among decision-making participants. Further, it calls for coordination of interests and the establishment and maintenance of clearly understood and observed channels of communication. While we thought it important that the continuum, and any scale or index from which it may ultimately be derived, reflect the spirit of the AAUP Statement, which is considered a fundamental document in defining shared governance in higher education, we drew from the literature to provide dispositional descriptors that characterize the relationship. The literature is clear about the desired characteristics of effective governance systems in repeated references to mutual trust and respect (Braskamp & Wergin, 1998; Gumport, 2000; Kezar & Eckel, 2004;Tierney, 1998).
While Symbiotic Functioning is marked by an optimal level of faculty cohesion and relational attitude, often the faculty are not a cohesive group. Instead, pockets of faculty exist with varying viewpoints, ensuring a lack of unanimity UNANIMITY. The agreement of all the persons concerned in a thing in design and opinion.
2. Generally a simple majority (q.v.) of any number of persons is sufficient to do such acts as the whole number can do; for example, a majority of the legislature can pass and often leading to disagreements and the need for negotiation. In such cases, a state of Wary Collaboration exists as both administrators and faculty seek to work carefully but not necessarily always in a feeling of openness and trust. Negotiation and placation pla·cate
tr.v. pla·cat·ed, pla·cat·ing, pla·cates
To allay the anger of, especially by making concessions; appease. See Synonyms at pacify. are seen as falling short of the ideal in that these qualities describe interactions that may not always be sufficient or effective to sustain a high performing governance system.
In the bottom left-hand quadrant, the relational attitude slides below neutral to focus on those instances where the administrator-faculty relationship is more rocky and is typified by lack of trust and conflict. In the Fractured Dissension context, though, the faculty are not joined in their discord and animosity with the administration. Instead, discord and suspicion are spread across fractured groups and through splinter groups splinter group
A group, such as a religious sect or political faction, that has broken away from a parent group.
Noun full of discontent. Not all faculty need be at odds with administration in this realm, although there is a prevailing tendency in that direction. The fragmentation among faculty may occur through disagreement among themselves, or disagreement over the relationship required or sought with administration.
The fourth and final quadrant represents an untenable institutional situation--Aggressive Discord between administration and faculty. In this instance, faculty are united in their opposition to the administration and what it is they are trying to accomplish or how they are trying to accomplish it. That is not to say that every single faculty member is anti-administration. However, our prevailing sentiment at this point is divergent with the administrative vision, and the faculty are by-in-large united in their opposition. At such a point, the environment is ripe for faculty initiatives to remove administrators and votes of no confidence in executive officers.
Focusing on the attitudinal context and faculty cohesion, Figure 1 leaves unaddressed the possibility of discord within the administrative culture. It is argued here that the administrative culture, by virtue of its bureaucratic nature and its overall focus on institutional and system level issues, tends by nature to be a more cohesive environment that does the faculty one. Consequently, while we believe discord amongst administrators does exist, the inclusion of a third axis representing administrative environments did not appear to benefit the discussion based on our reading of the literature. In the future, a consideration of administrative environments predicated on certain management fads A management fad is a derisive term use to characterize a change in philosophy or operations that sweeps through businesses and institutions, and then disappears when enthusiasm for it wanes. or inclusionary decision-making models may warrant consideration, and is a concern for future research.
Functional Contexts of the Relationship
Important also to the study of the faculty-administrator relationship is knowledge of the functional contexts within which joint decision-making is enacted. Knowing the contexts where joint decision-making occurs suggests the various organizational venues where studies of the relationship can be conducted. Further, it informs the direction of subsequent literature reviews where depictions of the relationship can be found for the purpose of more detailed study. The objective of such reviews will be to examine accounts of faculty-administrator decision-making activities to create a more comprehensive understanding of how they interact in a variety of functional contexts.
It is evident from the governance literature that there is little agreement on the areas of faculty authority. The AAUP Statement on governance does indeed list the broad areas of responsibility as educational policy, planning, budgeting, and administrator selection. These areas are at best difficult to match up with the contexts for faculty authority cited in the literature. Focusing on the role of academic senates, Minor (2004) describes their areas of involvement as varied based on the role played by the senate body in an institution. These include curriculum, tenure and promotion, instruction, and academic standards. Where senates are particularly influential, Minor adds institutional improvement matters, strategic and budget priorities, and faculty issues to the list. Leslie's (2003) attempt to answer the question of faculty authority areas examined where conflict in decision-making occurred. Because conflict underlies academic governance, according to Leslie, where there is conflict, authority also is at issue. He lists faculty recruiting, admissions, allocation of faculty lines, the structure of the faculty reward system, selection of department leadership, and degree requirements as focal areas. Rosser (2003), on the other hand, chose to focus on decision-making structures designed to solicit faculty participation as a gauge to determine the arenas of faculty authority--department-level decisions, faculty committees related to academic and fiscal affairs, and campus-wide deliberative de·lib·er·a·tive
1. Assembled or organized for deliberation or debate: a deliberative legislature.
2. Characterized by or for use in deliberation or debate. bodies (e.g., faculty senates) that deal with curriculum, promotion and tenure, program/degree requirements, professional activities, and student performance. Some perspectives represented more specific areas of faculty authority; for example, determination of curricula, methods of instruction, admission/graduation policies, selection and evaluation of faculty, and academic development of students (Bai, 2003). Dill and Helm (1988) included design of critical academic support services support services Psychology Non-health care-related ancillary services–eg, transportation, financial aid, support groups, homemaker services, respite services, and other services and the establishment of budget priorities, while O'Brien's (1998) declaration of faculty unionization as a matter of faculty authority was more issue specific.
The governance literature overall suggests that despite ongoing recommendations for improving the faculty-administrator relationship in the interest of more effective governance systems, that a permanent state of tension and conflict mark this relationship. While conflict indeed can be productive, the literature suggests that colleges and universities as a whole have not reached a point where a consistent and proven approach, or one best way of working together, including approaches to managing conflict to productive ends, can be identified. This is problematic given the press to make governance systems more responsive to fast changing societal so·ci·e·tal
Of or relating to the structure, organization, or functioning of society.
Adj. needs (Tierney, 1991).
The literature demonstrated interactions between faculty and administrators as typically occurring in formal decision-making contexts. Little attention was given to interactions outside their joint decision-making roles. This fails to acknowledge or critically evaluate the oft-considered powerful and popular notions of networking and other forms of socializing, and influencing as viable approaches to building trusting relationships. Interactions are most often characterized as fraught fraught
1. Filled with a specified element or elements; charged: an incident fraught with danger; an evening fraught with high drama.
2. with tension, mistrust, and clashes between self- and collective interests. The empirical literature provided little insight into the kinds and contexts of interactions that produced trusting, fruitful relationships, yet we believe there must be consistently productive models in practice and have spoken with many faculty and administrators who have achieved this sort of trust. Research is needed to frame exemplary models of the interaction dynamic in a variety of contexts and over time.
We conclude that additional reviews of the literature are needed across a broad sampling of decision-making contexts where administrative activity can impinge im·pinge
v. im·pinged, im·ping·ing, im·ping·es
1. To collide or strike: Sound waves impinge on the eardrum.
2. most significantly on faculty work, often threatening their sense of academic freedom and autonomy. These areas, which we intend to explore in an upcoming study are: curriculum and teaching, resourcing of academic programs, research, and promotion and tenure. This approach is supported by Dill and Helm's (1988) view that faculty participation extends well beyond decision-making and into the very nature of the academic enterprise itself. Examination of the four dispositional contexts in each of these areas will offer clues to the functionality of shared governance in each case.
A preliminary review of representative additional literature confirms what we expected, that comparisons of the perspectives of faculty and administrators on institutional decision-making issues have been understudied at best. While few researchers have taken a holistic approach holistic approach A term used in alternative health for a philosophical approach to health care, in which the entire Pt is evaluated and treated. See Alternative medicine, Holistic medicine. to understanding the relationship between these two important decision-making groups, participant Interactive behaviors as a key to the relationship have yet to be explored. Furthermore, contexts change. While exploring interactions within a decision-making context is the beginning, Wheatley's (1999) assertion of relationships as vital to organizational effectiveness Organizational effectiveness is the concept of how effective an organization is in achieving the outcomes the organization intends to produce. The idea of organizational effectiveness is especially important for non-profit organizations as most people who donate money to non-profit suggests that webs of inclusionary activity (Helgeson, 1995) encompass a variety of ways of being together that extend beyond decision-making contexts. The shared governance literature's depiction of the relationship tells us that decision-making in shared governance activities are but one aspect of this multi-faceted and dynamic relationship. While there have been great efforts to improve this relationship in practice, this paper points to the need for greater attention to the underlying dynamic of its strengths and weaknesses, specifically to overarching relational attitudes and levels of faculty cohesion. Greater knowledge of these dispositional contexts in terms of how they frame faculty-administrator interactions is vital. Future work in this area will aid institutions in framing what Becher (1989) has identified as "boundary crossings" needed to connect various subcultures in higher education organizations.
This analysis will be valuable in creating heuristic A method of problem solving using exploration and trial and error methods. Heuristic program design provides a framework for solving the problem in contrast with a fixed set of rules (algorithmic) that cannot vary.
1. empirical frameworks for including faculty-administrator relationship variables in future studies of governance restructuring in higher education. The dispositional contexts described in the model presented can be used as a tool for empirical study of the relationship and improvement in the practice of shared governance. The next step will be the validation of the model for assessing the quality of the working relationship between these two key constituents. Future work might highlight this relationship as a possible constraint in governance restructuring, particularly given Rhoades' (1995) contention that current operational assumptions must be challenged for progress to occur. Such a focus on the relationship aspect of shared decision-making will also advance the study of the human dynamic that many believe is so vital to our understanding of shared governance. Finally, our review challenges what seems to be a traditional reluctance to study this relationship (Del Favero, 2003) by formally identifying and acknowledging its characterization in the extant literature Extant literature refers to texts that have survived from the past to the present time. Extant literature can be divided into extant original manuscripts, copies of original manuscripts, quotations and paraphrases of passages of non-extant texts contained in other works, and challenging others to contribute to building a comprehensive body of research in this area.
American Association of University Professors. (1966). Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities. Washington, DC: American Association of University Professors.
Association of Governing Boards. (1996). Renewing the Academic Presidency: Stronger Leadership for Tougher Times. Washington, DC: Association of Governing Boards
Bai, K. (2003). The national scene: Faculty involvement in governance. In M. T. Miller & J. Caplow (Eds.), Policy and University Faculty Governance (pp. 19-30). Greenwich CT: Information Age.
Baldridge, J. V., Curtis, D. V., Ecker, G. P., & Riley, G. L. (2000). Alternative models of governance in higher education. In M. C. Brown II (Ed.), Organization and Governance in Higher Education, (5th ed., pp. 128-142). Boston: Pearson Custom.
Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of the disciplines. Bury St Edmunds Coordinates:
Bury St Edmunds is a town in the county of Suffolk, England, and was formerly the county town of West Suffolk. It is also the seat of the East of England Regional Assembly. , UK: Society for Research Into Higher Education The Society for Research into Higher Education (SRHE) is an independent United Kingdom-based international society which aims to improve the quality of higher education. , Open University Press.
Benjamin, R., & Carroll, S. (1993). Restructuring higher education--By design. RAND Issue Paper 2 (April). Santa Monica Santa Monica (săn`tə mŏn`ĭkə), city (1990 pop. 86,905), Los Angeles co., S Calif., on Santa Monica Bay; inc. 1886. Tourism and retailing are important, and the city has motion-picture, biotechnology, and software industries. , CA: RAND Corporation Rand Corporation, research institution in Santa Monica, Calif.; founded 1948 and supported by federal, state, and local governments, as well as by foundations and corporations. Its principal fields of research are national security and public welfare. , Institute for Education and Training.
Benjamin, R., & Carroll, S. (1998). The implications of the changed environment for governance in higher education. In W. G. Tierney (Ed.), The Responsive University: Restructuring for High Performance (pp. 92-119). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Johns Hopkins University, mainly at Baltimore, Md. Johns Hopkins in 1867 had a group of his associates incorporated as the trustees of a university and a hospital, endowing each with $3.5 million. Daniel C. Press.
Bensimon, E. M. (1991). The meaning of "good presidential leadership": A frame analysis. In M. W. Peterson (Ed.), Organization and Governance in Higher Education, (4th ed., pp. 421-431). Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster Simon & Schuster
U.S. publishing company. It was founded in 1924 by Richard L. Simon (1899–1960) and M. Lincoln Schuster (1897–1970), whose initial project, the original crossword-puzzle book, was a best-seller. Custom Publishing.
Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work. San Francisco San Francisco (săn frănsĭs`kō), city (1990 pop. 723,959), coextensive with San Francisco co., W Calif., on the tip of a peninsula between the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco Bay, which are connected by the strait known as the Golden : Jossey-Bass.
Birnbaum, R. (2003). The end of shared governance: Looking ahead or looking back. Retrieved March 19, 2004, from www.usc.edu/dept/chepa/gov/governance_roundtable_03.html
Blackburn, R. T., & Lawrence, J. H. (1995). Faculty at work. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Borland, K. W. (2003). The relationship between faculty and academic administration in governance functions. In M. T. Miller & J. Caplow (Eds.), Policy and University Faculty Governance (pp. 85-94). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Braskamp, L. A., & Wergin, J. F. (1998). Forming new social partnerships. In W. G. Tierney (Ed.), The Responsive University: Restructuring for High Performance (pp. 62-91). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Braxton, J. M., & Hargens, L. L. (1996). Variations among academic disciplines:analytical frameworks and research. Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, XI, 1-45.
Bray, N. J. (2003). Faculty perceptions of academic deans: Stakeholders Stakeholders
All parties that have an interest, financial or otherwise, in a firm-stockholders, creditors, bondholders, employees, customers, management, the community, and the government. , boundary-spanning, and social control. Unpublished doctoral dissertation dis·ser·ta·tion
A lengthy, formal treatise, especially one written by a candidate for the doctoral degree at a university; a thesis.
1. , Vanderbilt University Vanderbilt University, at Nashville, Tenn.; coeducational; chartered 1872 as Central Univ. of Methodist Episcopal Church, founded and renamed 1873, opened 1875 through a gift from Cornelius Vanderbilt. Until 1914 it operated under the auspices of the Methodist Church. , Nashville, TN.
Breslin, R. D. (2000). Lessons from the presidential trenches. Chronicle of Higher Education, November 10, 2000, B24.
Carlisle, B. A., & Miller, M. T. (1998). Current trends and issues in the practice of faculty involvement in governance. Unpublished manuscript. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 423758)
Chaffee, E. E. (1998). Listening to the people we serve. In W. G. Tierney (Ed.), The responsive university: Restructuring for high performance. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Clark, B. R. (1987). The academic life: Small worlds, different worlds. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation
The Carnegie Foundation ("Carnegie Stichting" in Dutch) is an organization based in The Hague, The Netherlands. for the Advancement of Teaching.
Clark, B. R. (1991). Faculty organization and authority. In M. W. Peterson (Ed.), Organization and governance in higher education, (4th ed., pp. 449-458). Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster Custom.
Cohen, M.D., & March, J.G. (1974). Leadership and ambiguity: The American college American College is the name of:
New York, Middle Atlantic state of the United States. It is bordered by Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, and the Atlantic Ocean (E), New Jersey and Pennsylvania (S), Lakes Erie and Ontario and the Canadian province of : McGraw-Hill.
Del Favero, M. (2003). Faculty-administrator relationships as integral to high performing governance systems: New frameworks for study. American Behavioral Scientist, 46(7), 902-922.
Dill, D. D. (1991). The nature of administrative behavior in higher education. In M. W. Peterson (Ed.), Organization and governance in higher education, (4th ed., pp. 369-388). Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster Custom.
Dill, D. D., & Helm, K. P. (1988). Faculty participation in strategic policy making. HigherEducation Handbook of Theory and Research, IV, 319-355.
Dressel, P. (1981). Administrative leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ehrenberg, R. G. (2000). Tuition rising: Why college costs so much. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press The Harvard University Press is a publishing house, a division of Harvard University, that is highly respected in academic publishing. It was established on January 13, 1913. In 2005, it published 220 new titles. .
Etzioni, A. (2000). Administrative and professional authority. In M. C. Brown II (Ed.),Organization and governance in higher education, (5th ed., pp. 111- 118). Boston: Pearson Custom.
Gayle, D. J., Hakim, T. M., Agarwal, V. K., & Alfonso, P. J. (1999). Turning culture clash Culture Clash is the name of:
Greer, D. (1997). Prospective governance. AGB AGB Game Boy Advance
AGB Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen (German: General terms and conditions / Standard business conditions)
AGB Ice Breaker (USCG)
AGB Asymptotic Giant Branch Occasional Paper #31: Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities. Washington, DC.
Guffey, J. S., & Rampp, L. C. (1998). Shared governance: Balancing the euphoria An interpreted programming language developed in 1993 by Robert Craig at Rapid Deployment Software that is noted for its execution speed, flexibility and simplicity. It can simulate any programming method including object-oriented constructs. . (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED418617)
Gumport, P. (2000). Academic governance: New light on old issues. Occasional Paper #42: Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities. Washington, DC.
Guskin, A. E. (1996). Facing the future: The change process in restructuring universities. Change, July/August, 27-37.
Helgesen, S. (1995). The web of inclusion. New York: Doubleday.
Keller, G. (2001). Governance: The remarkable ambiguity. In P. G. Altbach, P. Gumport, & B. Johnstone (Eds.), In defense of American higher education (pp. 304- 322). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Kezar, A., & Eckel, P. (2004). Meeting today's governance challenges. Journal of Higher Education, 75(4), 371-400.
Kissler, G. R. (1997). Who decides which budgets to cut? Journal of Higher Education, 68(4), 427-459.
Lawler, E. E., & Mohrman, S. A. (1996). Organizing for effectiveness: Lessons from business. In W. F. Massey (Ed.), Resource allocation resource allocation Managed care The constellation of activities and decisions which form the basis for prioritizing health care needs in higher education. Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, city (1990 pop. 109,592), seat of Washtenaw co., S Mich., on the Huron River; inc. 1851. It is a research and educational center, with a large number of government and industrial research and development firms, many in high-technology fields such as , MI: The University of Michigan (body, education) University of Michigan - A large cosmopolitan university in the Midwest USA. Over 50000 students are enrolled at the University of Michigan's three campuses. The students come from 50 states and over 100 foreign countries. Press.
Lazerson, M. (1997). Who owns higher education? The changing face of governance. Change (March/April), 10-15.
Leslie, D. (2003). Governance or Governing? Retrieved March 19, 2004, from www.usc.edu/dept/chepa/gov/governance_roundtable_03.html
Miller, M. T. (2003). Conclusion: Defining a critical meaning for shared governance. In M. T. Miller & J. Caplow (Eds.), Policy and university faculty governance (pp. 153-159). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Miller, M. T., Williams, C., & Garavalia, B. (2003). Path analysis and power rating of communication channels in a faculty senate setting. In M. T. Miller & J. Caplow (Eds.), Policy and University Faculty Governance (pp. 59-73). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Minor, J. T. (2004). Understanding faculty senates: Moving from mystery to models. The Review of Higher Education, 27(3), 343-363.
Morphew, C. C. (1999). Challenges facing shared governance within the college. New Directions for Higher Education, 105(Spring 1999), 71-79.
Mortimer, K., & McConnell, T. (1978). Sharing authority effectively. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
O'Brien, G. D. (1998). All the essential half-truths about higher education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press The University of Chicago Press is the largest university press in the United States. It is operated by the University of Chicago and publishes a wide variety of academic titles, including The Chicago Manual of Style, dozens of academic journals, including .
Peterson, M. W., & White, T. H. (1992). Faculty and administrator perceptions of their environments: Different views or different models of organization? Research in Higher Education, 33(2), 177-204.
Pope, M.L., & Miller, M. T. (1999). Stressors related to managing faculty governance in community colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED430606)
Rhoades, G. (1995). Rethinking restructuring in universities. Journal for Higher Education Management, 10(2), 17-30.
Rice, R.E., & Austin, A.E. (1988). High faculty morale: What exemplary colleges do right. Change, 20(2), 50-58.
Rosser, V. (2003). Historical overview of faculty governance in higher education. In M. T. Miller & J. Caplow (Eds.), Policy and university faculty governance (pp. 3-17). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
Schuster, J. H., Smith, D. G., Corak, K. A., & Yamada, M. M. (1994). Strategic governance: How to make big decisions better. ACE Series on Higher Education. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx oryx (ôr`ĭks), name for several small, horselike antelopes, genus Oryx, found in deserts and arid scrublands of Africa and Arabia. They feed on grasses and scrub and can go without water for long periods. Press.
Thelin, J. (2001). Campus and community: A world turned inside out? The Review of Higher Education, 25(1), 1-14.
Thompson, J. D., Hawkes, R. W., & Avery, R. W. (1969). Truth strategies and university organization. Educational Administration Quarterly, 5(Spring), 4-25.
Tierney, W. G. (1991). Organizational culture This article or section is written like an .
Please help [ rewrite this article] from a neutral point of view.
Mark blatant advertising for , using . in higher education: Defining the essentials. In M. W. Peterson (Ed.), Organization and governance in higher education, (4th ed., pp. 126-139). Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster Custom.
Tierney, W. G. (1998). The responsive university: Restructuring for high performance. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.
Tierney, W. G. (2000). Critical leadership and decision making in a postmodern post·mod·ern
Of or relating to art, architecture, or literature that reacts against earlier modernist principles, as by reintroducing traditional or classical elements of style or by carrying modernist styles or practices to extremes: world. In M. C. Brown II (Ed.), Organization and governance in higher education, (5th ed., pp. 537- 549). Boston: Pearson Custom.
Weingartner, R. H. (1996). Fitting form to function: A primer prim·er
A segment of DNA or RNA that is complementary to a given DNA sequence and that is needed to initiate replication by DNA polymerase. on the organization of academic organizations. Phoenix AZ: American Council on Education Established in 1918, the American Council on Education (ACE) is a United States organization comprising over 1,800 accredited, degree-granting colleges and universities and higher education-related associations, organizations, and corporations. , Oryx Press.
Welsh, J. F., & Metcalf, J. (2003). Faculty and administrative support for institutionaleffectiveness activities. Journal of Higher Education, 74(4), 445-468.
Westmeyer, P. (1990). Principles of governance and administration in higher education. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Wheatley, M. J. (1999). Leadership and the new science (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
About the Authors
Marietta Del Favero is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Leadership, Research, and Counseling at Louisiana State University Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, generally known as Louisiana State University or LSU, is a public, coeducational university located in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and the main campus of the Louisiana State University System. , Baton Rouge, Louisiana For the Canadian restaurant, see .
Baton Rouge (from the French bâton rouge), pronounced /ˈbætn ˈɹuːʒ/ in English, and . Her research focuses on academic leadership and governance in higher education, and faculty work, with particular emphasis on faculty-administrator relationships and differences across academic disciplines.
Nathaniel J. Bray is an assistant professor in the Department of Educational Leadership, Policy, and Technology Studies at the University of Alabama The University of Alabama (also known as Alabama, UA or colloquially as 'Bama) is a public coeducational university located in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, USA. Founded in 1831, UA is the flagship campus of the University of Alabama System. , Tuscaloosa, Alabama Tuscaloosa is a city in west central Alabama in the southern United States. Located on the Black Warrior River, it is the seat of Tuscaloosa CountyGR6 and the fifth-largest city in Alabama with a population of 83,052 (2006 U.S. Census Bureau Estimate). . Dr. Bray's interests stem from a sociology of the organization perspective, and include student affairs Student affairs staff are responsible for academic advising and support services delivery at colleges and universities in the United States and abroad. The chief student affairs officer at a college or university often reports directly to the chief executive of the institution. and retention as well as the relationship of faculty and administrators.
Marietta Del Favero, Louisiana State University Nathaniel Bray, The University of Alabama
Table 1. Characterizations of the Faculty-Administrator Relationship Holistic Participant Participant Descriptions Perceptions Behaviors * We-they * Administrators are Administrators relationship over-bearing/ (Borland, 2003) overpowering (F) * Disregard for (Carlisle & Miller, faculty rights; * Philosophical split 1998) shut faculty out of (O'Brien, 1998) process (Carlisle & * Lack of respect for Miller, 1998) * Adversarial faculty (A) (Mortimer & (Miller, 2003) * Placating, McConnell, 1978) coalition * Colleagues in development * Inability to work administration are (Miller, Williams & together; animosity "enemies" (F) Garavalia, 2003) (Minor, 2004) (Ehrenberg, 2000) * Deviate from wishes * Uncomfortable * Expectation of of faculty (Miller, alliance; potential "display of Williams, & for friction authenticity" (F/A) Garavalia, 2003) (Guffey & Rampp, (Guffey & Rampp, 1998) 1998) * Resentment/ suspicion of * Marked by conflict * "While others faculty involved in (Greer, 1997; decide, faculty administrative work Leslie, 2003) feel left out" (F) (Pope & Miller, (Leslie, 2003) 1999) * Two alternative realities that are * Faculty are more * Cooperation (Minor, irreconcilable; knowledgable (F) 2004) negotiation of (Etzioni, 2000) contested terrain * Contact with (Leslie, 2003) * Suspicion, fear, faculty receives divisiveness, little time * Undercurrent of insecurity (F) compared to other strife (Guffey & (Kissler, 1997) activities (Dill, Rampp, 1998) 1991) * Lack of trust on * Consultative both sides (Bai, (Weingartner, 1996) 2003; Borland, 2003; Guffey & * Supportive (Leslie, Rampp, 1998; Minor, 2003) 2004) * Coloring, altering, * Deep chasms exist misusing, and (Gayle, Hakim et holding information al, 1999) hostage (Guffey & Rampp, 1998) * Value conflicts (Dill, 1991) * Displays of authenticity, * Choice in commitment to interaction is process (Guffey & conciliation or Rampp, 1998) confrontation (Greer, 1997) Faculty * Latent hostilities * Faculty resistance (Thompson, Hawkes & of administrative Avery, 1969) controls (Gumport, 2000) * Turf struggles (Guffey & Rampp, * Placating, 1998) coalition development * Lack of frequent (Miller, Williams dialogue (Borland, & Garavalia, 2003) 2003) * Inattentive to * Animosity (Carlisle institutional & Miller, 1998) issues (O'Brien, 1998) * Problem is lack of agreement not lack * Resist of consultation acknowledgement of (O'Brien, 1998) administrative authority (Etzioni, * Ineffective 2000) communication (Miller, Williams, * React defensively Garavalia, 2003) to administrator suggestions; cede * Educational ground grudgingly outcomes almost (AGB, 1996) never discussed; stalemate/gridlock * Anger and describe frustration about deliberations perceived lack of (Guffey & Rampp, consultation 1998) (Kissler, 1997)