Zeine et al. 2011 Organizational Culture in Higher Education, in Kazeroony, H. (Ed.), The Strategic...

Organizational Culture in Higher Education Zeine et al. 2011

1

Organizational Culture in Higher Education

Abstract

Zeine1, 3, R., Boglarsky2, C.A., Blessinger3, P., and Hamlet1, M.T.

1Keller Graduate School of Management at DeVry College of New York,

2Human Synergistics, Inc., 3Higher Education Teaching and Learning Association

The organizational culture of academic higher educational institutions was

analyzed using the Human Synergistics International (HSI) Organizational Culture

Inventory® (OCI®) Survey. Cultural norms characteristic of Passive/Defensive and

Aggressive/Defensive behavioral styles were overrepresented, while those

characteristic of Constructive styles were underrepresented, as compared to Ideal

profiles. The results reflect predominance of task-centered over people-centered

organizational orientations and of lower-order (security) over higher-order (satisfaction)

needs. Both current and ideal profiles were derived from the responses of higher

education faculty and administrators who are active at non-profit or for-profit

organizations worldwide. Targets for cultural change were identified, and

recommendations were developed to assist higher education institutions approach their

ideal organizational cultures.

ZEINE, R., Boglarsky, C.A., Blessinger, P., and Hamlet, M.T. (2011). Organizational Culture in Higher Education. Chapter 3 in Kazeroony, H. (Ed.), The Strategic Management of Higher Education Institutions: Serving Students as Customers for Institutional Growth. Business Expert Press, LLC, New York, NY, USA.


2

Introduction

Organizational Culture in Higher Educational Institutions (HEds.) can be

examined with regards to behavioral norms that have been extensively studied in the

context of guiding organizational change in the corporate world. HEds are social sector

organizations that differ in purpose and performance measures from business

corporations (Stilwell, 2003; Collins, 2005). Because the purpose of social sector

organizations is to meet social objectives, human needs and national/global priorities,

the people affiliated with them are ambitious first and foremost for the causes, the

movements, the missions, the work ‒ not themselves ‒ and they have the will to do

whatever it takes to make good on that ambition (Collins, 2005, pp.19,11). HEds can be

viewed as service providers fulfilling diverse customer needs (Akinyele, 2010; Soars,

2009; Watjatrakul, 2009). More complex dimensions apply in HEds because students

can be viewed as products, customers, coworkers and laborers simultaneously

(Obermiller et al. 2005; Halbesleben et al. 2003; Pitman, 2000). Ideally, a culture of

selflessness and excellence would be expected throughout the range of HEds, including

those that rely heavily on business revenue streams such as medical centers and for-

profit colleges (Collins, 2005, pp. 20-21; Schnier, 2004; Soars, 2009; Bennett Clark,

2011). Because financial incentives are weak in non-profit organizations, their ability to

generate funds to support their non-business activities depends on effectively tapping

into the idealistic passions of their deeply committed members and benefactors (Collins,

2005, pp.16-18). In this chapter, we analyze the currently prevailing organizational

culture and compare it to the ideal cultural profile for HEds as measured by the


3

Organizational Culture Inventory® (OCI®)1 (Cooke & Lafferty, 2003).

Perceptions of the work environment shape the ‘organizational climate’ which is a

function of how employees experience their organizations (Patterson et al., 2005). In

the absence of active guidance aimed at nurturing healthy organizational dynamics,

organizational cultures tend to default to rather constraining or low-performance states.

For example, research indicates that people interacting on a task tend to voluntarily

construct differences in hierarchy, and to contribute to their own disempowerment to

maintain a stable hierarchical social order (Pfeffer, 2010, pp. 220-1). Some studies

have shown that, in contrast to higher-status schools, members of lower-status

universities tend to accept the fact, and the implications, of the lowered status of their

educational institution, and do not take initiative to bolster it (Jost & Banaji, 1994).

People inside organizations who agree on organizational goals, often hold differing

views on how to accomplish shared objectives (Pfeffer, 2010, p.224). Consequently,

organizations can lose their vitality and begin to “age” as they remain unable or

unwilling to evolve and change (Blanchard et. al. 1997, p.136). Preliminary studies

have highlighted the importance, of exploring the complex barriers to cultural renewal in

academic institutions in order to identify appropriate targets, and develop suitable

mechanisms, for cultural change (Lobas, 2006; Kay et al. 2010).

“Culture forms the superglue that bonds an organization, unites people, and

helps an enterprise accomplish desired ends” (Bolman & Deal, 2008, p.253). “Some

argue that organizations have cultures, others insist that organizations are cultures”

(Bolman & Deal, 2008, p.269). Organizational culture has been defined as “a pattern of

1 Organizational Culture Inventory® and OCI® are trademarks of and copyrighted © by Human

Synergistics International. All rights reserved. Used with permission.


4

shared basic assumptions that a group learned as it solved its problems of external

adaptation and integration, that has worked well enough to be considered valid and

therefore to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in

relation to those problems” (Schein, 1992, p.12).

Distinct but interdependent subcultures have been noted in HEds especially in

regards to academic vs. administrative divisions, and for-profit/business/clinical vs. non-

profit/research/educational organizations (Kuo, 2009; Pitman, 2000; Calabrese &

Shoho, 2000; Bennett Clark, 2011). A systematic analysis of current and ideal

organizational cultures can inform HEds professionals on specific changes that would

help them meet and exceed expectations (Tricker, 2003; Soares, 2009, Kay et al.

2010).

The Organizational Culture Inventory® (OCI®)2 is a quantitative instrument that

measures 12 sets of behavioral norms associated with three general types of

organizational cultures: Constructive, Passive/Defensive, and Aggressive/Defensive3

(Cooke & Szumal, 2000). It focuses on twelve behavioral patterns that members

believe are required to “fit in” and “meet expectations” within their organization (Szumal,

2003). Descriptions of the twelve styles measured by the OCI are provided in Table 1.

2 Organizational Culture Inventory® and OCI® are trademarks of and copyrighted © by Human

Synergistics International. All rights reserved. Used with permission. 3 OCI style names and descriptions from Robert A. Cooke and J. Clayton Lafferty, Organizational Culture

Inventory®, Human Synergistics International. Copyright © 1987-2011. All rights reserved.


5

Table 1. Descriptions of the Twelve Styles Measured by the

Organizational Culture Inventory® (and Sample Items)

Constructive Cultures encourage members to interact with people and approach tasks

in ways that will help them to meet their higher-order satisfaction needs for affiliation,

esteem and self-actualization:

(11:00) An Achievement culture characterizes organizations that do things well and

value members who set and accomplish their own goals. Members are expected

to set challenging but realistic goals, establish plans to reach these goals, and

pursue them with enthusiasm. (Pursue a standard of excellence; Openly show

enthusiasm). Achievement organizations are effective; problems are solved

appropriately, clients and customers are served well, and the orientation of

members, as well as the organization itself, is healthy.

(12:00) A Self-Actualizing culture characterizes organizations that value creativity,

quality over quantity, and both task accomplishment and individual growth.

Members are encouraged to gain enjoyment from their work, develop

themselves, and take on new and interesting activities. (Think in unique and

independent ways; Do even simple tasks well). While self-actualizing

organizations can be somewhat difficult to understand and control, they tend to

be innovative, offer high-quality products and/or services, and attract and

develop outstanding employees.

(1:00) A Humanistic-Encouraging culture characterizes organizations that are

managed in a participative and person-centered way. Members are expected to

be supportive, constructive and open to influence in their dealings with one


6

another. (Help others to grow and develop; Take time with people). A humanistic

culture leads to effective organizational performance by providing for the growth

and active involvement of members who, in turn, report high satisfaction with and

commitment to the organization.

(2:00) An Affiliative culture characterizes organizations that place a high priority on

constructive interpersonal relationships. Members are expected to be friendly,

open, and sensitive to the satisfaction of their work group. (Deal with others in a

friendly, pleasant way; share feelings and thoughts). An Affiliative culture can

enhance organizational performance by promoting open communication, good

cooperation, and the effective coordination of activities. Members are loyal to

their work groups and feel they “fit in” comfortably.

Passive/Defensive Cultures are those in which members believe they must interact

with people in ways that will not threaten their own security:

(3:00) An Approval culture describes organizations in which conflicts are avoided and

interpersonal relationships are pleasant – at least superficially. Members feel

that they should agree with, gain the approval of, and be liked by others. (Go

along with others; Be liked by everyone). This work environment can potentially

limit organizational effectiveness by minimizing constructive “differing”, and

inhibiting the expression of ideas and opinions.

(4:00) A Conventional culture is descriptive of organizations that are conservative,

traditional, and bureaucratically controlled. Members are expected to conform,

follow the rules, and make a good impression. (Always follow policies; Fit into the


7

“mold”). Too conventional a culture can interfere with effectiveness by

suppressing innovation and preventing the organization from adapting to

changes in its environment.

(5:00) A Dependent culture is descriptive of organizations that are hierarchically

controlled, non-participative and do not empower their members. Centralized

decision making in such organizations leads members to do only what they are

told and to clear all decisions with superiors. (Please those in positions of

authority; Do what is expected). Poor performance results from the lack of

individual initiative, spontaneity, flexibility, and timely decision making.

(6:00) An Avoidance culture characterizes organizations that fail to reward success but

nevertheless punish mistakes. This negative reward system leads members to

shift responsibilities to others and avoid any possibility of being blamed for a

mistake. (Wait for others to act first; Take few chances). The survival of this type

of organization is in question since members are unwilling to make decisions,

take action, or accept risks.

Aggressive/Defensive Cultures expect members to approach tasks in forceful ways to

protect their status and security:

(7:00) An Oppositional culture describes organizations in which confrontation prevails

and negativism is rewarded. Members gain status and influence by being critical

and thus are reinforced to oppose the ideas of others (Point out flaws; Be hard to

impress), and to make safe (but ineffectual) decisions. While some questioning

is functional, a highly oppositional culture can lead to unnecessary conflict, poor


8

group problem solving and “watered-down” solutions to problems.

(8:00) A Power culture is descriptive of non-participative organizations structured on

the basis of the authority inherent in members’ positions. Members believe they

will be rewarded for taking charge and controlling subordinates, and for being

responsive to the demands of superiors. (Build up one’s power base; Demand

loyalty). Power-oriented organizations are less effective than their members

might think; subordinates resist this type of control, hold back information, and

reduce their contributions to the minimal acceptable level.

(9:00) A Competitive culture is one in which winning is valued and members are

rewarded for out-performing one another. Members operate in a “win-lose”

framework and believe they must work against (rather than with) their peers to be

noticed. (Turn the job into a contest; Never appear to lose). An overly competitive

culture can inhibit effectiveness by reducing cooperation and promoting

unrealistic standards of performance that are either too high or too low.

(10:00) A Perfectionistic culture characterizes organizations in which perfectionism,

persistence, and hard work are valued. Members feel they must avoid any

mistakes, keep track of everything, and work long hours to attain narrowly-

defined objectives. (Do things perfectly; Keep on top of everything). While some

amount of this orientation might be useful, too much emphasis on perfectionism

can lead members to lose sight of the goal, get lost in detail, and develop

symptoms of strain.

Note. From Organizational Culture Inventory by Robert A. Cooke and J. Clayton Lafferty, 1987, Plymouth, MI: Human Synergistics International. Copyright © 1987, 2011 by Human Synergistics, Inc. Reproduced by permission. The OCI style descriptions and items may not be reproduced without the express and written permission of Human Synergistics.


9

In higher education, teaching hospitals can also be identified as “high reliability”

organizations due to the “life and death” nature of healthcare services. Some

institutions, such as the Military and nuclear power plants, are considered “high

reliability” organizations requiring very high fidelity to a chain of command, and strict

adherence to protocols (Szumal, 2003). Although behavioral norms from the

Aggressive/Defensive and Passive/Defensive clusters may be highly represented,

studies have shown that Constructive norms are desired and important for the success

of such organizations because they help people to understand the reasons why orders

need to be followed, and the benefits of faithfully implementing best practices in

performing critical duties (Reigle, 2001).

Methods

Participants from Higher Education Institutions completed Human Synergistics

OCI and OCI-Ideal surveys (web-based version). The OCI measures the behavioral

norms and expectations members understand are expected of them to “fit in” and meet

expectations in their current position at their organization or the current state. It also

measures outcomes associated with organizational culture (e.g., intention to stay,

satisfaction and customer service orientation) that provide insights into the need for

cultural change (Cooke & Lafferty, 2003). A parallel form of the inventory, the OCI-

Ideal, asks the members to indicate the extent to which the behavioral norms and

expectations should be expected in order to maximize their organization’s effectiveness.

The results of the OCI-Ideal is the desired state and can be seen as a cultural

benchmark.


10

Respondents’ OCI and OCI-Ideal unadjusted (or “raw”) scores were pooled and

converted to percentile scores which were plotted on an OCI Circumplex shown in

Figure 1. The OCI circumplex compares respondents’ organization’s scores along the

twelve cultural norms to the scores of 921 organizational subunits (e.g., departments

and divisions of other organizations). The bold center ring on the circumplex represents

the 50th percentile. In general, scores falling below the 50th percentile are low relative to

other organizations and scores that fall above the 50th percentile are high relative to

other organizations (Cooke, 2011).

Norms that reflect expectations for people-oriented behaviors are located on the

right side of the Circumplex, while task-oriented norms are on the left side. The norms

toward the top reflect expectations for behaviors that are directed toward higher-order

needs for satisfaction, and those toward the bottom reflect expectations that focus on

meeting lower-order needs for security (Fig. 1) (Cooke & Szumal, 2000). By analyzing

the gaps or discrepancies between the current and ideal culture profiles, the behavioral

norms where there is the greatest need for change can be identified. These gaps were

calculated by subtracting the ideal from the current percentile scores. Undesirable gap

values were negative for Constructive norms (too low), and positive for

Passive/Defensive and Aggressive/Defensive norms (too high) (Szumal, 2003).


11

Figure 1. Organizational Culture Inventory® Circumplex

Note: Research and development by Robert A. Cooke, Ph.D. and J. Clayton Lafferty, Ph.D. Copyright © 1973-2011 by Human Synergistics International. All rights reserved.

Results

Demographics of Respondent HEds Professionals

Demographics of the HEds professionals who participated in the study are

presented in Table 2. Of the 63 who responded to the OCI survey, 33 responded to the

OCI Ideal survey. They represented faculty, directors, chairs and deans at non-profit

and for-profit colleges and universities. The number of years spent at their current


12

organizations ranged from less than 6 months to more than 15 years.

Table 2. Demographics of Respondents

Demographic OCI

Current OCI Ideal

(n=63) (n=33) Age

30 - 39 10% 6%

40 - 49 35% 24%

50 - 59 30% 36%

60 or over 17% 30%

nd* 8% 3%

Gender

Female 43% 45%

Male 52% 55%

nd* 5% -

Years with Organization

Less than 6 months 5% 6%

6 months to 1 year 3% 0%

1 to 2 years 16% 18%

2 to 4 years 17% 24%

4 to 6 years 6% 9%

6 to 10 years 13% 18%

10 to 15 years 13% 9%

More than 15 years 22% 15%

nd* 5% -

Organization Level

Faculty/Professor 40% 45%

Director 24% 12%

Department Chair 6% 6%

Associate. Dean 6% 6%

Dean 11% 9%

Provost/Dean Academic Affairs 2% 3%

nd* 11% 18%


13

Table 2. Demographics of Respondents (continued)

Demographic OCI Current

OCI Ideal

(n=63) (n=33)

Education

Bachelor’s degree 2% 3%

Master’s degree 21% 15%

Doctorate degree 52% 58%

MD 2% 3%

MD/PhD 19% 18%

Other 2% -

nd* 3% 3%

Institutional Type

For-profit, Public 17% 12%

For- profit, Private 21% 24%

Not-for-profit, Public 38% 33%

Not-for-profit, Private 16% 18%

nd* 8% 12%

Institutional Level

Associate's College 3% 3%

Bachelor's College 6% 6%

Master's College/University 35% 36%

Doctorate-granting University 46% 48%

Special Focus Institution 2% -

nd* 8% 6%

*not determined

Differences Between Current and Ideal HEds Organizational Culture Profiles

Undesirable gaps in percentile scores between Current (Fig. 2 Left) and Ideal

(Fig. 2 Right) were found in all twelve styles on the HEds OCI profiles (Table 3).

Extensions of the Constructive styles fell below the 73rd percentile in the current profile

while rising above the 92nd percentile in the ideal (Table 3). Passive/Defensive styles


14

extended above 54% in the current profile while remaining less than 15% in the ideal

(Table 3). The lowest gap between current and ideal was in the Oppositional style

norms which extended to 67% in the current profile, only 10% higher than ideal (Table

3). This is consistent with cultural norm requirements of “high reliability” organizations.

Figure 2. Current vs. Ideal HEds OCI® Profiles

Current Culture Ideal Culture



15

Note: OCI style names and descriptions from Robert A. Cooke and J. Clayton Lafferty, Organizational Culture Inventory®, Human Synergistics International. Copyright © 1987-2011. All rights reserved. Adapted by permission.

Differences Between Non-Profit and For-Profit HEds in Organizational Culture

As compared to the current Non-Profits OCI profile (Fig. 3 Upper Left), the

current For-Profit profile (Fig. 3 Lower Left) had wider extensions along several of the

Aggressive/Defensive and Passive/Defensive styles. As compared to the ideal Non-

Profit profile (Fig. 3 Upper Right), the ideal For-Profit profile (Fig. 3 Lower Right) had a

narrower extension on the Oppositional style but wider extensions on the 7 remaining

Table 3. GAP ANALYSIS FOR HEds ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE STYLES

STYLE

PERCENTILE SCORE

CLUSTER IDEAL CURRENT GAP

HUMANISTIC-ENCOURAGING 98 73 -25 CONSTRUCTIVE

ACHIEVEMENT 98 67 -31 CONSTRUCTIVE

SELF-ACTUALIZING 98 61 -37 CONSTRUCTIVE

AFFILIATIVE 92 55 -37 CONSTRUCTIVE

OPPOSITIONAL 57 67 10 AGGRESSIVE/DEFENSIVE

COMPETITIVE 31 63 32 AGGRESSIVE/DEFENSIVE

PERFECTIONISTIC 23 52 29 AGGRESSIVE/DEFENSIVE

POWER 23 50 27 AGGRESSIVE/DEFENSIVE

AVOIDANCE 15 59 44 PASSIVE/DEFENSIVE

DEPENDENT 14 55 41 PASSIVE/DEFENSIVE

CONVENTIONAL 10 54 44 PASSIVE/DEFENSIVE

APPROVAL 9 55 46 PASSIVE/DEFENSIVE


16

Defensive styles. The Constructive cluster extensions were similar in Non-Profit and

For-Profit HEds (Fig. 3 Upper Left vs. Lower Left, and Upper Right vs. Lower Right).


17

Figure 3. Non-Profit vs. For-Profit HEds Organizational Culture Profiles

Current OCI® Culture

Non-Profit N = 34

Ideal OCI® Culture

Non-Profit N = 17

Current OCI® Culture For-Profit

N = 24

Ideal OCI® Culture

For-Profit N = 12



18

Implications of the cultural gaps on outcomes

People at HEds experience both the negative and positive consequences of their

organization’s cultures. Comments from 35 respondents offered insightful suggestions

for effecting change in higher education (Human Synergistics Inc., 2011, April), calling

for “systematic changes starting with mission/vision, hiring and reward systems”. One

wrote: “Make everyone in the pipeline at educational institutions better educated in

best-practices, more accountable for their outcomes and for meeting targets; and hold a

higher standard for quality teaching and for grading students”. Others echoed:

“Emphasize independent, critical thinking, and place greater responsibility for adaptive

learning on the student”, “Communicate initiatives timely and thoroughly”. The

participants’ comments were harmonious and can be summed up as a call to promote

“systems and processes that support: good governance; understanding stakeholders’

needs; strong culture of continuous improvement; organizational culture that values and

respects individuals and promotes their learning and professional development; strong

data-driven planning; organizational agility; integrity in word and deeds”.

Quantitative analysis of the organizational outcomes revealed desirable gaps in

several areas and undesirable gaps in others. Intention to stay, personal customer

service, satisfaction and personally recommending the HEd as a good place to work all

fell well above the historical average; while organizational customer service, role clarity

and role conflict fell well below the historical average.

Both the qualitative and quantitative cultural outcome measures indicate a need

for changes in structures, systems, technologies, and skills/qualities of the HEds.

Respondents urged, “Focus on students and their needs. Ask yourself, how can


19

creating a great experience (learning and otherwise) make the student grow more?

How does that student's experience help our institution grow and become better?”

Some were concerned that “Higher education is no longer about the students, but about

the business…” (Human Synergistics Inc., 2011, April). These comments highlight the

importance for HEds to become more service oriented. Low scores along service

quality measures indicate the need for the establishment of service-oriented procedures

and norms, evaluation and possible re-engineering of core processes, customer-service

training, and the revision of reward systems (to reinforce goal attainment) (Szumal,

2003).

Recommendations

Recommendations for Leading Cultural Change

We recommend that both for-profit and non-profit HEds implement strategies used

by organizational leaders seeking to effect change (Blanchard, 1997 and Reigle 2001):

1) Use belief systems (vision, mission, core values) and performance measures to

strike an effective balance between creativity and control. Become living symbols of

the newly minted organizational culture and assist executives to fulfill this

requirement by providing training and appropriate feedback systems.

2) Plan for, create and celebrate progress and work accomplishments.

3) Enlist people who are highly talented, intelligent, energetic, tenacious, and who are

committed to placing the interests of the organization above their own self-interests.

4) Empower change enthusiasts with communication and consultation skills.

5) Establish effective conflict resolution processes.


20

6) Convey a sense of urgency by increasing awareness of the need for change.

7) Identify, replace or eliminate rules and policies (i.e. compensation, performance-

appraisal systems, organizational priorities) that are incompatible with the new

vision. Implement open-door policy.

8) Ensure inclusive involvement and participation in shaping the transformative

process.

9) Build trust by disseminating information to people in all roles and at all levels

throughout the organization.

10) Inspire imagination and creativity by safeguarding freedoms, encouraging risk-

taking and protecting research time.

11) Search constantly for newer and better ways to do everything.

12) Developing a shared vision and ensuring congruency of action.

13) Supporting one another and working with others. Encourage open-mindedness,

innovation and problem-solving.

Recommendations for Adopting and Adapting High Performance Practices

We recommend that both for-profit and non-profit Higher Education Institutions adopt

Pfeffer’s (1998) seven practices of high performing corporations to their business and

administrative divisions, while developing corresponding alternatives for their academic

divisions:

1) Employment security, or employment opportunity alternatives (externships,

internships, work-study, career development and placement services)

2) Selective hiring, or selective admission alternatives


21

3) Self-managed teams and decentralization of decision making, or participative

cultural alternatives (feedback, communication, consultation)

4) Comparatively high compensation contingent on organizational performance, or

academic support alternatives (grants, fellowships, scholarships)

5) Extensive training including leadership, management and communication skills

6) Reduced status distinctions and barriers

7) Extensive sharing of financial and performance information throughout the

organization

Recommendations for Reducing Defensive Cultural Styles and Promoting a

Constructive Organizational Culture:

Unresolved conflicts, de-motivation, work avoidance and high turnover are

consequences of Passive/Defensive organizational cultures where conflicts are

primarily resolved by either accommodation or withdrawal (Szumal, 2003). Insecurity,

disempowerment, disrespect, and punishment characterize Aggressive/Defensive

cultures as they value confrontation, criticism, coercion and overconfidence (Szumal,

2003). By contrast, flexibility, consultation, knowledge, reason and coordination are

features of Constructive organizational cultures as they encourage communication,

sharing and cooperation with others (Szumal, 2003).

We recommend that both for-profit and non-profit Higher Education Institutions

adopt the Human Synergistics International recommendations to cultivate Constructive

norms within organizations at the member, unit and organizational levels:

1) Ensure that all members are given the opportunity to work to their full potential


22

2) Balance expectations for taking initiative and thinking independently with those for

consensus and power sharing

3) Expect participation without domination

4) Elicit unique perspectives and concerns while working towards agreement

5) Value quality over quantity

6) Value creativity over conformity

7) Judge effectiveness at the system level rather than the component level

8) Practice empowerment and transformational leadership which are prescriptive

(guide and direct) rather than restrictive (constrain and prohibit) practices

9) Adopt approaches for continuous, system-wide, improvements including problem

solving, strategic planning, innovation, and benchmarking

10) Inspire innovation by allowing people to express themselves, experiment and learn

from mistakes

11) Increase accomplishments by encouraging people to set challenging goals, and by

providing them with necessary resources

12) Cultivate mentors by investing in training and development, and by providing

opportunities for expansion

13) Enhance cooperation by letting people communicate, get to know one another,

contribute and share ideas

14) Inculcate humanistic values of mutual encouragement and support

15) Develop organizational mechanisms to collect and respond to feedback, implement

good suggestions

16) Remember that education institutions are “Learning Organizations” which


23

emphasize creativity, individual development and systems thinking

17) Treat all members of the organization with respect and dignity

18) Provide equitable pathways for advancement (or alternative opportunities for

placement elsewhere)

Conclusion

This chapter profiles organizational culture in Higher Education Institutions.

Twelve cultural styles are analyzed, and differences between current and ideal

behavioral norms are identified as targets for organizational change in Non-Profit and

For-Profit colleges and universities. Recommendations are presented to assist

professionals in their efforts to implement strategies that would reduce the intensity of

eight Defensive patterns and promote four prescribed Constructive cultural styles.

Further studies are warranted to examine subgroup and sub divisional cultures within

educational institutions.

Acknowledgements

We thank all the distinguished respondents for their participation and input. We are

grateful to Sarah Peterson of Human Synergistics, Inc. for expert assistance.


24

References

Akinyele, S.T. (2010). Customers: Identifying the Needs in Higher Education.

Educational Research, 1(7), 210-218.

Bennett Clark, J. (2011, May). The Real Deal on For-Profit Colleges. Kiplinger’s, 65(5),

64-68.

Blanchard, K. & Waghorn, T. with Ballard, J. (1997). Putting the Right People on the

Right Team with the Right Kind of Support. In Mission Possible: Becoming a

World-Class Organization While There’s Still Time (ch. 4, pp. 119-153). New

York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill.

Bolman, L.G. & Deal, T.E. (2008). Organizational Symbols and Culture. In Reframing

Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (4th ed., ch. 12, pp. 251- 278).

San Francisco, CA, USA: John Wiley & Sons.

Calabrese, R.L. & Shoho, A. (2000). Recasting Educational Administration Programs

as Learning Organizations. The International Journal of Educational

Management, Bradford, 14(5), 210.

Collins, J. (2005). Good to Great and the Social Sectors: Why Business Thinking is Not

the Answer, a monograph to accompany Good to Great. New York, NY, USA:

HarperCollins.

Cooke, R.A. (2011). OCI® Detailed Report. Plymouth, MI USA: Human Synergistics.

Cooke, R.A. & Lafferty J.C. (2003). Organizational Culture Inventory. Plymouth, MI,

USA: Human Synergistics.

Cooke, R.A. & Szumal, J.L. (2000). Using the Organizational Culture Inventory® to

Understand the Operating Cultures of Organizations. In Ashkanasy, N.M.,


25

Wilderom C.P.M. & Peterson M.F. (Eds.) Handbook of Organizational Culture

and Climate. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications.

Halbesleben, J.R.B., Becker, J.A.H. and Buckley, M.R. (2003) Considering the Labor

Contributions of Students: An Alternative to the Student-as-Customer Metaphor.

Journal of Education for Business, May-June, pp. 255-257.

Human Synergistics Inc., (2011, April). HETL-Keller Higher Ed Research Project, OCI

Feedback Report, Appendix B, B1-B3. Human Synergistics International.

Jost, J.T. and Banaji, M.R. (1994). The role of Stereotyping in System-Justification and

the Production of False Consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33,

1-27.

Kay, J., Dunne, E. and Hutchinson, J. (2010) Rethinking the Values of Higher

Education – Students As Change Agents ? The Quality Assurance Agency for

Higher Education. Retrieved April 28, 2011 from

http://www.qaa.ac.uk/students/studentengagement/studentschangeagents.pdf

Kuo, H-M. (2009). Understanding Relationships Between Academic Staff and

Administators: an Organizational Culture Perspective. Journal of Higher

Education Policy and Management, 31(1), 43-54.

Lobas, J. G. (2006). Leadership in Academic Medicine: Capabilities and Conditions for

Organizational Success. The American Journal of Medicine, 119(7), 617-621.

Obermiller, C., Fleenor, P. and Raven, P. (2005). Students as Customers or Products:

Perceptions and Preferences of Faculty and Students. Marketing Education

Review, 15(2), 27-36.

Patterson, M.G., West, M.A., Shackleton, V.J., Dawson, J.F., Lawthom, R., Maitlis, S.,


26

Robinson, D.L. and Wallace, A.M. (2005). Validating the Organizational Climate

Measure: Links to Managerial Practices, Productivity and Innovation. Journal of

Organizational Behavior, 26, 379-408.

Pfeffer, J. (1998). Seven Practices of Successful Organizations. In The Human

Equation: Building Profits by Putting People First (ch.3, pp. 64-98). Boston, MA,

USA: Harvard Business School Press.

Pfeffer, J. (2010). Power Dynamics: Good for Organizations, Good for you? In

Power: Why Some People Have it – And Others Don’t (ch.12, pp.213-225). New

York, NY, USA: HarperCollins.

Pitman, T. (2000). Perceptions of Academics and Students as Customers: a Survey of

Administrative Staff in Higher Education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and

Management, 22(2), 165-175.

Reigle, R.F. (2001). Measuring Organic and Mechanistic Cultures. Engineering

Management Journal, 13(4), 3-8.

Schein, E.H. (1992). Organizational Culture and Leadership. (2nd ed.) San Francisco,

CA, USA: Jossey-Bass.

Schnier, K.L. (2004). Organizational Culture of Faculty Members at Regionally

Accredited , Associate Degree-Granting, Proprietary Institutions (Doctoral

dissertation). Loyola University, Chicago, IL, USA

Soares, L. (2009) Putting the Customer First in College: Why We Need an Office of

Consumer Protection in Higher Education. Center for American Progress.

Retrieved April 28, 2011 from

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/11/consumer_protection.html


27

Stilwell, F. (2003). Higher Education, Commercial Criteria and Economic Incentives.

Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 25(1), 51-61.

Szumal, J.L. (2003). Organizational Culture Inventory OCI® Interpretation &

Development Guide. Plymouth, MI, USA: Human Synergistics.

Tricker, T. (2003). Student Expectations – How Do We Measure Up ?

Retrieved April 28, 2011 from

http://inter-disciplinary.net/ati/education/ioe/ioe2/tricker%20paper.pdf

Watjatrakul, B. (2009). Using the Students-as-Customers Concept in Technology

Disciplines: Students’ Perspectives. World Academy of Sciences, Engineering

and Technology, 51, 173-177.

Zeine et al. 2011 Organizational Culture in Higher Education, in Kazeroony, H. (Ed.), The Strategic...

Business

Transcript of Zeine et al. 2011 Organizational Culture in Higher Education, in Kazeroony, H. (Ed.), The Strategic...