Higher Education: The Role of Universities Research Structure
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52634/mier/2018/v8/i2/1389Keywords:
Conceptual Model, Effectiveness, Research Structure.Abstract
As higher education plays a pivotal role in the economic well-being of modern societies, universities today are faced with increasing pressure in order to improve their accountability and performance. They have to redesign the research structure to achieve the set objectives. The present survey aimed at studying the factors and related indicators that affect the effectiveness of the research structure of the universities. The sample included 274 faculty members who were selected through stratified random method at 8 branches of Islamic Azad University in Tehran province (Iran). Research questions were: a) What key Factors influence the Effectiveness of the universities’ research structure? and b) What conceptual model can be designed? Finally, in this study using a questionnaire and factor analysis technique, eight factors were identified and ranked which contribute towards the effectiveness of research structure in universities . Finally, a conceptual model has been proposed for the universities to strengthen their research structure.
Downloads
Metrics
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Nader Gholi Ghorchian, Shahrooz Farjad, Ali Taghipour Zahir
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The articles published in the MIER Journal of Educational Studies, Trends and Practics (MJESTP) are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
- Copyright on any open access article in the MIER Journal of Educational Studies, Trends and Practics (MJESTP) published by Model Institute of Education and Research (MIER) is retained by the author(s).
- Author(s) grant MIER a license to publish the article and identify himself/herself/themselves as the original publisher.
- Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
- The Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 formalizes these and other terms and conditions of publishing articles.
References
Ambrose, M.L., & Schminke, M. (2003). Organizational structure as a moderator of the relationship between procedural justice, interactional justice, perceived organizational support, and supervisory trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 295- 305.
Atwater, L. E. (1995). The relationship between supervisory power and organizational characteristics. Group & Organization Management, 20, 460- 485.
Blau, P.M. (1970). Decentralization in bureaucracies. In: Zald, M.N.(Ed.), Power in Organisations. Vanderbilt University Press, Nashville, TN, 150–174.
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock.
Burton, R. M., & Obel, B. (2004). Strategic organizational diagnosis and design: The dynamics of fit, third edition. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Cross, R. (2000). Looking before you leap: Assessing the jump to teams in knowledge based work. Business Horizons, 43(5), 29–36. September.
Burton, R. M., DeSanctis, G., & Obel, B. (2006). Organizational design: A step by step approach. Cambridge University Press.
Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 555–590.
Daft, R.L. (1995). Organization theory and design, 5th ed. West Publishing Company: St. Paul, MN.
Dewar, R., & Werbel, J. (1979). Universalistic and contingency predictions of employee satisfaction and conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly 24, 426–448.
Donaldson, L. (2001). The contingency theory of organizations. Sage: Thousand Oaks.
House, R. J. (1991). The distribution and exercise of power in complex organizations: A meso theory. Leadership Quarterly, 2, 23- 58.
Germain, R. (1996). The role of context and structure in radical and incremental logistics innovation adoption. Journal of Business Research 35, 117–127.
Khandwalla, P.N. (1977). The design of organizations. New York: Harcourt Brace Janovich.
Koufteros, X.A., Vonderembse, M.A., & Doll, W.J. (1998). Developing measures of time-based manufacturing. Journal of Operations Management, 16(1), 21–41.
Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1969). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Homewood: Irwin.
Mathur, P., & Nair, M. (2016). Organization Structure a Key to Driver to Competitive Advantage. International Journal of Management and Commerce Innovations 3(2), 348-356.
Miner, J.B., (1982). Theories of organizational structure and process. The Dryden Press, Chicago, IL.
Nazem, F. (2015). The structural model of knowledge management in universities. International Journal for Cross-Disciplinary Subjects in Education, 5 (2), 2482 - 2486.
Pierce, J.L., & Delbecq, A.L. (1977). Organizational structure, individual attitudes, and innovation. Academy of Management Review, 2, 26–37.
Prasad, L. M. (1994). Organizational behavior. New Delhi: Sultan Chand & Sons.
Ramezan, M. (2011). Intellectual capital and organizational organic structure in knowledge society: How are these concepts related? International Journal of Information Management, 31, 88–95.
Razia, M.A. (2015). Comparative analysis of organizational structure and effectiveness between public and private universities: A case of university of East Africa Baraton and Moi University in Kenya.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 4(8), 15-25.
Ruekert, R.W., Walker Jr., O.C., & Roering, K.J. (1985). The organization of marketing activities: A contingency theory of structure and performance. Journal of Marketing, 49, 13–25.
Schminke, M., Ambrose, M.L., Cropanzano, R.S. (2000). The effect of organizational structure on perceptions of procedural fairness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 294–304.
Scott, W. R. (1998). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.
Singh, J. V. (1986). Technology, size and organizational structure: A reexamination of the Gkayama study data. Academy of Management Journal, 29(4), 800–812.
Skivington, J.E., & Daft, R.L. (1991). A study of organizational framework and process modalities for the implementation of business-level strategic decisions. Journal of Management Studies, 28(1), 45–68.
Sparrow, P.R., & Hiltrop, J.M. (1997). Redefining the field of European human resource management: A battle between national mindsets and forces of business transition. Human Resource Management, 36(2), 201-19.
Walton, R.E. (1986). A vision-led approach management restructuring. Organizational Dynamics, 14(4), 5-17.
Wang, C.L., & Ahmed, P.K. (2003). Organizational learning: A critical review. Learning Organization, 10(1), 8-17.
Zheng, W., Yang, B., & McLean, G.N. (2010). Linking organizational culture, structure, strategy, and organizational effectiveness: Mediating role of knowledge management. Journal of Business Research, 63, 763–771.
