高等教育中的中层领导:挑战与机遇

IF 2.7 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
T. Bush
{"title":"高等教育中的中层领导:挑战与机遇","authors":"T. Bush","doi":"10.1177/17411432221112489","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Leadership in higher education is perceived to be increasingly managerial in many contexts. Power is often centralised in a senior leadership team headed by a president or vice chancellor. Departmental leadership may then be seen as primarily a conduit for the implementation of top-down decision-making rather than an opportunity to carve out a distinctive identify linked to the academic and professional norms of subject disciplines. University reputations are based on the collective achievements of their departments, but this may not be reflected in sufficient scope for such middle leaders to define their role or the future of the sub-units they represent. Responsibility without power, for example in respect of financial and staff management, is a recipe for frustration for such academic leaders. As a consequence, being appointed as a department head may be seen as a ‘poisoned chalice’ rather than a reward. Sharon Kruse explores these issues in her study of department chair leadership in the United States. She cites Buller’s (2012: 3) comment that chairing a department in higher education is ‘probably the most important, least appreciated, and toughest administrative position in higher education’. Drawing on 45 interviews with department chairs, she focuses on chairs’ perceptions of their role. Her findings indicate that chairs struggle to balance their approaches to the work, in an unavoidable and often overwhelming political landscape, with limited institutional authority. Greeni Maheshwari and Rakkishore Nayak explore the barriers and enablers to women leadership in Vietnamese higher education. They note that women in Vietnam widely accept their traditionally ascribed roles as housewives and experience challenges when seeking leadership positions. They interviewed 21 people, 19 women and 2 men, working in higher education institutions in Ho Minh City and Hanoi, including senior leaders, middle managers and lecturers. They report that the main barriers to career enhancement were work–life imbalance, subordinates’ perceptions, social networking and personal factors. The enablers were perceived to be family and mentor support, changing mindset of employers, and the potential competency of women leaders. These factors are consistent with international research but understanding these issues in this distinctive context contributes to our understanding of this important and complex phenomenon. Promotion opportunities in higher education may also disadvantage women. Ed Dandalt and Stephane Brutus examine this issue in respect of business schools in Canada. They report that women are under-represented as full professors in Canadian business schools (only 23% are women). They conducted a survey of tenured female faculty in these business schools, followed by the analysis of faculty collective agreements between six universities and faculty unions or professional associations. They conclude that, while there is evidence of gender discrimination, often unconscious rather than overt, this is not the only organisational barrier to the promotion of female faculty in Canadian business schools. Xiaohua Jiang reports on the transformation of a Swiss university, drawing on 22 interviews with university leaders and faculty members. She utilises Kotter’s Organisational Change model Editorial","PeriodicalId":47885,"journal":{"name":"Educational Management Administration & Leadership","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Middle leadership in higher education: Challenges and opportunities\",\"authors\":\"T. Bush\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17411432221112489\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Leadership in higher education is perceived to be increasingly managerial in many contexts. Power is often centralised in a senior leadership team headed by a president or vice chancellor. Departmental leadership may then be seen as primarily a conduit for the implementation of top-down decision-making rather than an opportunity to carve out a distinctive identify linked to the academic and professional norms of subject disciplines. University reputations are based on the collective achievements of their departments, but this may not be reflected in sufficient scope for such middle leaders to define their role or the future of the sub-units they represent. Responsibility without power, for example in respect of financial and staff management, is a recipe for frustration for such academic leaders. As a consequence, being appointed as a department head may be seen as a ‘poisoned chalice’ rather than a reward. Sharon Kruse explores these issues in her study of department chair leadership in the United States. She cites Buller’s (2012: 3) comment that chairing a department in higher education is ‘probably the most important, least appreciated, and toughest administrative position in higher education’. Drawing on 45 interviews with department chairs, she focuses on chairs’ perceptions of their role. Her findings indicate that chairs struggle to balance their approaches to the work, in an unavoidable and often overwhelming political landscape, with limited institutional authority. Greeni Maheshwari and Rakkishore Nayak explore the barriers and enablers to women leadership in Vietnamese higher education. They note that women in Vietnam widely accept their traditionally ascribed roles as housewives and experience challenges when seeking leadership positions. They interviewed 21 people, 19 women and 2 men, working in higher education institutions in Ho Minh City and Hanoi, including senior leaders, middle managers and lecturers. They report that the main barriers to career enhancement were work–life imbalance, subordinates’ perceptions, social networking and personal factors. The enablers were perceived to be family and mentor support, changing mindset of employers, and the potential competency of women leaders. These factors are consistent with international research but understanding these issues in this distinctive context contributes to our understanding of this important and complex phenomenon. Promotion opportunities in higher education may also disadvantage women. Ed Dandalt and Stephane Brutus examine this issue in respect of business schools in Canada. They report that women are under-represented as full professors in Canadian business schools (only 23% are women). They conducted a survey of tenured female faculty in these business schools, followed by the analysis of faculty collective agreements between six universities and faculty unions or professional associations. They conclude that, while there is evidence of gender discrimination, often unconscious rather than overt, this is not the only organisational barrier to the promotion of female faculty in Canadian business schools. Xiaohua Jiang reports on the transformation of a Swiss university, drawing on 22 interviews with university leaders and faculty members. She utilises Kotter’s Organisational Change model Editorial\",\"PeriodicalId\":47885,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Management Administration & Leadership\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Management Administration & Leadership\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221112489\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Management Administration & Leadership","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432221112489","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在许多情况下,高等教育中的领导被认为是越来越多的管理。权力通常集中在以校长或副校长为首的高级领导团队中。因此,部门领导可能主要被视为执行自上而下决策的渠道,而不是一个与学科的学术和专业规范相联系的独特身份的机会。大学的声誉是建立在院系的集体成就基础上的,但这可能没有充分反映在这些中层领导的范围内,以确定他们的角色或他们所代表的子单位的未来。没有权力的责任,例如在财务和员工管理方面,会让这些学术领袖感到沮丧。因此,被任命为部门主管可能被视为“有毒的圣杯”,而不是一种奖励。莎伦·克鲁斯在她对美国系主任领导的研究中探讨了这些问题。她引用了布勒(2012:3)的评论,即高等教育部门的主任“可能是高等教育中最重要、最不受重视、也是最艰难的行政职位”。通过对45位系主任的采访,她重点关注了系主任对自己角色的看法。她的研究结果表明,在一个不可避免的、往往势不可挡的政治环境中,在有限的制度权威下,主席们很难平衡自己的工作方法。Greeni Maheshwari和Rakkishore Nayak探讨了越南高等教育中女性领导的障碍和推动因素。他们指出,越南妇女普遍接受她们传统上被认为是家庭主妇的角色,在寻求领导职位时也会遇到挑战。他们采访了21人,19名女性和2名男性,他们在胡志明市和河内的高等教育机构工作,包括高级领导、中层管理人员和讲师。他们报告说,职业提升的主要障碍是工作与生活的不平衡、下属的看法、社交网络和个人因素。促成因素包括家庭和导师的支持、雇主心态的改变以及女性领导者的潜在能力。这些因素与国际研究一致,但在这种独特的背景下理解这些问题有助于我们理解这一重要而复杂的现象。高等教育的晋升机会也可能使妇女处于不利地位。Ed Dandalt和Stephane Brutus从加拿大商学院的角度研究了这个问题。他们报告说,女性在加拿大商学院的正教授中所占比例不足(只有23%是女性)。他们对这些商学院的终身女教员进行了调查,然后分析了六所大学与教员工会或专业协会之间的教员集体协议。他们得出的结论是,尽管存在性别歧视的证据(往往是无意识的,而不是公开的),但这并不是加拿大商学院晋升女教师的唯一组织障碍。蒋晓华为您报道瑞士一所大学的转型,他采访了22位大学领导和教职员工。她采用了科特的组织变革模型
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Middle leadership in higher education: Challenges and opportunities
Leadership in higher education is perceived to be increasingly managerial in many contexts. Power is often centralised in a senior leadership team headed by a president or vice chancellor. Departmental leadership may then be seen as primarily a conduit for the implementation of top-down decision-making rather than an opportunity to carve out a distinctive identify linked to the academic and professional norms of subject disciplines. University reputations are based on the collective achievements of their departments, but this may not be reflected in sufficient scope for such middle leaders to define their role or the future of the sub-units they represent. Responsibility without power, for example in respect of financial and staff management, is a recipe for frustration for such academic leaders. As a consequence, being appointed as a department head may be seen as a ‘poisoned chalice’ rather than a reward. Sharon Kruse explores these issues in her study of department chair leadership in the United States. She cites Buller’s (2012: 3) comment that chairing a department in higher education is ‘probably the most important, least appreciated, and toughest administrative position in higher education’. Drawing on 45 interviews with department chairs, she focuses on chairs’ perceptions of their role. Her findings indicate that chairs struggle to balance their approaches to the work, in an unavoidable and often overwhelming political landscape, with limited institutional authority. Greeni Maheshwari and Rakkishore Nayak explore the barriers and enablers to women leadership in Vietnamese higher education. They note that women in Vietnam widely accept their traditionally ascribed roles as housewives and experience challenges when seeking leadership positions. They interviewed 21 people, 19 women and 2 men, working in higher education institutions in Ho Minh City and Hanoi, including senior leaders, middle managers and lecturers. They report that the main barriers to career enhancement were work–life imbalance, subordinates’ perceptions, social networking and personal factors. The enablers were perceived to be family and mentor support, changing mindset of employers, and the potential competency of women leaders. These factors are consistent with international research but understanding these issues in this distinctive context contributes to our understanding of this important and complex phenomenon. Promotion opportunities in higher education may also disadvantage women. Ed Dandalt and Stephane Brutus examine this issue in respect of business schools in Canada. They report that women are under-represented as full professors in Canadian business schools (only 23% are women). They conducted a survey of tenured female faculty in these business schools, followed by the analysis of faculty collective agreements between six universities and faculty unions or professional associations. They conclude that, while there is evidence of gender discrimination, often unconscious rather than overt, this is not the only organisational barrier to the promotion of female faculty in Canadian business schools. Xiaohua Jiang reports on the transformation of a Swiss university, drawing on 22 interviews with university leaders and faculty members. She utilises Kotter’s Organisational Change model Editorial
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Management Administration & Leadership
Educational Management Administration & Leadership EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
19.40%
发文量
63
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信