INFORMATION TO USERS
This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer.
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand corner and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.
Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.
University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. Ml 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 Order Number 9505213
Cultural knowledge and upward influence: A study of non-academic middle managers at multi-purpose midwestern university
Hallenbeck, Susan Leslie, Ph.D.
The Ohio State University, 1994
Copyright ©1994 by Hallenbeck, Susan Leslie. All rights reserved.
UMI 300 N. ZeebRd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 CULTURAL KNOWLEDGE AND UPWARD INFLUENCE:
A STUDY OF NON-ACADEMIC MIDDLE MANAGERS
AT MULTI-PURPOSE MIDWESTERN UNIVERSITY
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School
of The Ohio State University
By
Susan Leslie Hallenbeck, M.B.A.
The Ohio State University
1994
Dissertation Committee: roved by
Robert J. Silverman
Brad A. Mitchell Adviser liege of Education Carla Edlefson Department of Educational Policy and Leadership Copyrighted 1994 by Susan Leslie Hallenbeck ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
No undertaking of this magnitude is possible without the help and support of a great many individuals. I have been fortunate to have been guided in this process by my advisor, Dr. Robert Silverman. His insight and counsel were critical to both the development of the dissertation itself and also to the learning that accompanied this study. I would also like to thank the other members of my committee, Dr.
Carla Edlefson and Dr. Brad Mitchell, for their suggestions and encouragement.
Thanks are also due to my firm, Clemans, Nelson & Associates, for their understanding and support throughout the final phases of the dissertation.
I would like to express my appreciation to the staff of Multi-Purpose
Midwestern University, with special thanks to Jay, Scott, Joyce and Carrie for their willingness to participate and share their experiences with me. Without their cooperation, and the support of the institution itself, this study would not have been possible.
Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for their love and
* understanding. I would especially like to recognize my mother, Shirley Hallenbeck, for her faith in my abilities and her constant support throughout my doctoral program. VITA
July 10, 1958 Bom - New Haven, Connecticut
June, 1976 B.A., Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, Ohio
1983-84 Director of Transfer Admissions, Ashland University, Ashland, Ohio
May, 1986 M.B.A., Executive Management, Ashland University, Ashland, Ohio
1987-1989 Associate Director of Admissions, Capital University, Columbus, Ohio
1989-1993 Graduate Assistant, University College, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
1993-Present Management Consultant, Clemans, Nelson & Associates, Inc., Columbus, Ohio
FIELD OF STUDY
Major Field: Education TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...... ii
VITA ...... iii
LIST OF TABLES ...... ix
LIST OF FIGURES ...... x
CHAPTER I ...... 1 INTRODUCTION...... 1 Framework and Assumptions of the Study ...... 2 Statement of the Problem ...... 5 Theoretical Propositions ...... 6 Methodological Framework ...... 8 Participants: Middle Managers ...... 9 Participants: Decision-Makers...... 10 Documentary Analysis ...... 11 Research Site ...... 11 Significance of the Study ...... 12 Focus and Limitations of the Study ...... 13
CHAPTER II ...... 16 REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE ...... 16 Collegiate Middle Managers ...... 16 Middle Managers and Decision-Making in Higher Education . 20 Definition of Decision Making ...... 20 Information Processing ...... 21 Exclusion of Middle Managers From Formal Decision Making ...... 23 Inclusion of Middle Managers in Formal Decision M aking ...... 25 Informal Roles and Structures ...... 31 Upward Influence . ■>...... 31 Organizational Culture ...... 37 Definitions of Organizational Culture ...... 38
iv Knowledge and Organizational Culture ...... 46
CHAPTER III ...... 47 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY...... 47 Ethnographic Research Perspective...... 47 Research Site ...... 48 Holistic and Embedded Research ...... 50 Research Participants: Middle Managers ...... 52 Research Participants: Decision M akers...... 53 Data-Gathering Methods ...... 54 Interview s...... 54 Interview questions ...... 56 Observational research ...... 60 Documentary analysis ...... 61 Research Time L in e ...... 62
CHAPTER I V ...... 64 THE CULTURAL KNOWLEDGE FRAMEWORK...... 64 Cognitions ...... 64 Dictionary Knowledge ...... 66 Directory Knowledge ...... 69 Recipe Knowledge ...... 71 Axiomatic Knowledge ...... 73 Functional Domains ...... 74 Sackmann’s Framework and the Current S tudy ...... 75 Similarities Between Sackmann and the Current Study 76 Differences Between the Two Studies ...... 76
CHAPTER V ...... 79 INSTITUTIONAL AND INDIVIDUAL PROFILES . 79 Multi-Purpose Midwestern University: An Institutional P rofile...... 81 Individual Profiles: Middle Managers ...... 85 Profile for J a y ...... 85 Profile for Scott...... 88 Profile for Joyce ...... 92 Profile for C arrie ...... 95 Individual Profiles: Senior Administrators ...... 99 Profile for F rank ...... 99 Profile for Richard ...... 102 Profile for George ...... 104 Profile for Ernest...... 107
v CHAPTER V I ...... 114 DATA ANALYSIS: DICTIONARY KNOWLEDGE...... 114 Dictionary Knowledge ...... 115 Personal Dictionary Knowledge ...... 116 Impersonal Dictionary Knowledge ...... 120 Duties and responsibilities ...... 121 Duties and responsibilities of others ...... 122 Perspectives on data and information...... 123 Summary ...... 124
CHAPTER VII ...... 126 DIRECTORY KNOWLEDGE ...... 126 Overview of Dimensions and Themes in Directory Knowledge...... 126 Process Knowledge ...... 128 Internal indirect process knowledge...... 129 Internal direct process knowledge ...... 131 External indirect process knowledge ...... 133 External direct process knowledge...... 135 Relationships ...... 139 Internal relationship knowledge ...... 141 External relationship knowledge...... 144 Strategy ...... 152 Indirect internal strategic knowledge ...... 153 Direct internal strategic knowledge ...... 155 Indirect external strategic knowledge ...... 158 Direct external strategic knowledge ...... 161 Summary ...... 166 Information processing ...... 166 Relationship knowledge...... 167 Strategic knowledge ...... 168
CHAPTER V III...... 172 RECIPE KNOWLEDGE...... 172 Implied Knowledge...... 174 Themes in Implied Recipe Knowledge...... 178 Legitimation ...... 178 Pragmatic/efficient ...... 180 Boundaries ...... 183
vi Implied Knowledge and Other Forms of Cultural Knowledge ...... 184 Implied recipe knowledge and directory knowledge ...... 184 Implied recipe knowledge and axiomatic knowledge ...... 185 Explicit Recipe Knowledge...... 188 Themes in Explicit Recipe Knowledge ...... 193 Legitimation ...... 193 Pragmatism/efficiency ...... 195 N eglect...... 197 Sales ab ility ...... 199 Explicit Recipe Knowledge and Directory Knowledge . 201 Summary ...... 205
CHAPTER I X ...... 208 AXIOMATIC KNOWLEDGE ...... 208 Institutional Image and Culture ...... 209 Institutional Mission, Structure, and Decision Processes .... 214 Educational M ission ...... 214 Institutional Decisions ...... 215 Faculty influence ...... 215 Decision making process...... 216 Institutional considerations ...... 217 R elig io n ...... 220 Professional Axiomatic Knowledge ...... 222 Summary ...... 225
CHAPTER X ...... 229 PERSONAL AXIOMATIC KNOWLEDGE...... 229 Themes in Personal Axiomatic Knowledge ...... 233 Values and Beliefs ...... 234 Team w ork ...... 234 The good of the institution ...... 236 The roles of administrators ...... 238 Hopes and ideals...... 239 Value or impact of information...... 240 Self-satisfaction ...... 242 Assumptions and Perceptions ...... 244 Perceptions of others...... 244 Perceptions of self...... 252 Perceptions of the institution ...... 257
vii Influence of Values, Beliefs and Perceptions on Job Performance ...... 260 Impact of beliefs on research choices...... 260 Impact of perceptions on job performance .... 262 Summary ...... 267
CHAPTER X I ...... 269 DISCUSSION...... 269 Review of the Study Objectives ...... 269 Reflections on Methodology ...... 270 The Ethnographic Research Perspective...... 270 The Research Participants ...... 274 The Organizational Culture Perspective ...... 276 The Cultural Knowledge Framework ...... 280 Cultural Knowledge Themes and Dimensions ...... 280 Personal Characteristics and Cultural Knowledge .... 285 Gender and Cultural Knowledge ...... 289 Upward Influence...... 290 Cultural Knowledge, Upward Influence, and Organizational C u ltu re ...... 294 Implications for Practice and Research 296 Summary ...... 305
APPENDIX A Interview Questions ...... 307 First Round-- Middle M anagers ...... 307 Second Round-Middle M anagers ...... 308 Third Round-Middle M anagers ...... 309 Questions for C arrie ...... 310 Questions for J a y ...... 311 Questions for Joyce ...... 311 Questions for Scott ...... 311 Questions for Decision Makers ...... 312
APPENDIX B Cultural Knowledge Categories of Middle Managers 314
REFERENCES 315 LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1. Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) Dictionary Dimensions and Themes 115 2. Themes in Directory Knowledge and Resulting Process Knowledge 129 3. Themes in Directory Knowledge and Resulting Relationship Knowledge 140 4. Impact of Cultural Knowledge on Strategy 153 5. Directory Knowledge Strategies by Middle Manager 169 6. Themes in Recipe Knowledge 173 7. Frequency of Personal Axiomatic Responses 231 8. Co-occurrence of Personal Axiomatic Knowledge with Other Cultural Knowledge 232 9. Themes in Personal Axiomatic Knowledge 234 10. Dimensions and Themes 282 11. Cultural Knowledge of Middle Managers by 314 Interview
ix LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
1. Dimensions in Dictionary Themes (Adapted from Sackmann, 1991) 68
x CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The number of non-academic middle managers (Scott, 1978) in higher education administration has grown at a relatively rapid pace throughout the mid-
1980s and into the 1990s (Grassmuck, 1991; Nicklin & Blumenstyk, 1993).
However, the role and influence of these managers on institutional decision-making has received little attention in higher education research (Reyes & Smith, 1987;
Sutherland, 1972). What research there is usually focuses on their involvement in form al processes through which administrative staff participate in decision making, or on the lack of formal institutional governance structures for non-academic staff.
This study adds to current understanding by examining how middle managers affect institutional decisions through informal means. Rather than focusing on decision-making structures or organizational hierarchies, this study will examine the interpersonal networking and information processing activities of non-academic middle managers and the impact that these activities have on the information provided to institutional decision makers. In addition, this study examines how an institution’s culture in general, and administrative subcultures in particular, affect
1 and are affected by middle managers in the performance of those tasks which relate to institutional decision processes.
Framework and Assumptions of the Study
The primary assumption for this study is that "reality", as it is lived by human beings, is socially constructed (Benson, in Morgan, 1983; Berger &
Luckmann, 1966; Sackmann, 1991; Smircich, in Morgan, 1983b; Tierney, 1991).
The relationships and institutions created by humans affect and are in turn affected by social interaction. Thus, according to Ott (1989), "Organizational culture is a dynamic social construction....a reality created by its members" (p. 190). Similarly, as Jelinek, Smircich & Hirsch (1983) note, "Culture-another word for social reality-is both product and process, the shaper of human interaction and the outcome of it, continually created and recreated by people’s ongoing interactions"
(p. 331).
Smircich (1983a) postulates that the concept of "culture" in organizational research can be either a variable or a root metaphor. To paraphrase Pacanowsky
& O’Donnell-Trujillo (1983; in Ott, 1989), the issue is whether culture is something the organization has or something the organization is (p. 49). Both the culture-as- variable ("has") and the culture-as-root-metaphor ("is") approaches are helpful in examining organizations. Whether one sees culture as a variable or a metaphor in 3
part depends on the orientation of the research and the questions or issues to be
addressed.
The culture-as-variable approach, demonstrated in both comparative
management studies and research on corporate culture, seeks to find ways in which
the culture of an organization can be manipulated or used to achieve specific
purposes (Barley, Meyer & Gash, 1988; Sackmann, 1991; Smircich, 1983a). When
including culture as a variable, the investigator also assumes that organizations are
akin to organisms; the organization exists within a particular environment that
provides stimuli to which the organization must respond (Smircich, 1983a). Culture
may be understood either as an independent or dependent variable (Smircich,
1983a); either way, the organization is viewed as
[E]xisting within an environment that presents imperatives for behavior. In the first case, "culture" is part of the environment and is seen as a determining or imprinting force. In the second case, organizational culture is seen as a result of human enactment... .The desired outcomes of research into these patterns are statements of contingent relationships that will have applicability for those trying to manage organizations....Because both of these research approaches have these basic purposes, the issue of causality is of critical importance (p. 347).
In contrast, the three basic categories of management research themes identified by Smircich (1983a) as belonging to the perspective of culture as root metaphor include organizational cognition, organizational symbolism, and the unconscious processes of organizations. The questions and purposes of research for scholars holding the culture as root metaphor perspective lead them "to ask different 4
questions and to pursue their research programs in different ways" (Smircich,
1983a, p. 353).
When culture is viewed as a root metaphor it becomes "an epistemological
device to frame the study or organization as social phenomenon" (Smircich, 1983a,
p. 353). Similarly, Barley et al. (1988) note that researchers investigating
organizational culture and symbolism using the interpretive perspective originally
viewed their studies as a means of proposing and defining an alternative paradigm
for the study of organizations.
The questions and issues addressed in this study are related to the category
of organizational cognition, as defined by Smircich (1983a) and further explicated by Sackmann (1991). I view organizational culture as a root metaphor or epistemological paradigm and therefore focus this research on the shared cognitions of a particular academic institution.
At the same time, however, I am also interested in learning how an organization, specifically an educational institution, can employ knowledge gained from this study in its everyday operations. Thus, there is an element of practicality
in this research. Barley et al. (1988) note that "academic" writing on the topic of organizational culture is beginning to resemble that of "practitioner" literature in that
the former is focusing more "on the economic value of controlling culture and on rational control and differentiation" (p. 52) while the latter has always evidenced this
focus. 5
For these reasons, then, this research investigates several aspects of institutional organization and information processing to examine whether there are ways to enhance the institution’s effectiveness in day-to-day operations.
Statement of the Problem
Two primary research assumptions guided this study. The first is that organizational members negotiate and create the organization’s culture (Chaffee &
Tierney, 1988; Tierney, 1991). This culture is reflected in members’ shared cognitions and sense-making mechanisms (Sackmann, 1991). The second assumption is that non-academic middle managers, while not directly or formally involved in decision making processes at their institutions, nevertheless influence university policies and decisions through their role in information gathering, processing, and transmission. Thus, these activities, and the ways in which they are accomplished, form the means by which middle managers exert "upward influence"
(Mowday, 1978) within the institution.
To tie these two themes together, this study investigates how non-academic middle managers, through the use of their individual discretion and informal intraorganizational networks, affect the decisions and policies made by Multi-
Purpose Midwestern University. The key questions addressed were: 6
**How do non-academic middle managers negotiate and structure their work experiences and work environment with respect to sense-making and information exchange?
**How do the informal sense-making mechanisms and information exchanges of middle managers relate to their exercise of upward influence?
The middle managers observed in this study were individuals who had no formal role in the decision-making processes of the university, but were involved in processing and analyzing data and information used by people who were in positions with formal institutional decision-making authority.
Theoretical Propositions
Yin (1989) notes that the dominant strategy for developing and later analyzing a case study design is to develop theoretical propositions. These propositions in turn affect the literature reviewed, the questions asked, and the data collection methods used (Yin, 1989).
At the same time, however, the nature of this type of research is such that attention needs to focus on themes and issues that emerge from the data (Fetterman,
1989; Patton, 1990; Sackmann, 1991). Thus, the initial theoretical propositions listed below guided the early stages of the research and clarified the research assumptions. While organizational culture per se is not the primary focus of this study, it is assumed that the culture of the institution, and particularly of the occupational subgroup to which the middle managers belong, will influence the actions and choices of non-decision makers. These actions and choices will, in turn, affect the actions and choices of individuals who are part of the institution’s formal decision making process.
One way of identifying organizational subgroups is by examining the types of information relevant to individuals as they perform their work (Sackmann, 1991).
Institutional decision makers often depend on the information provided by middle managers. Thus, the experiences and the backgrounds of these non-decision makers, and the information that they perceive to be most valuable, should influence the actions and policies of the institution. In addition, both the institutional culture and the assumptions individuals hold regarding knowledge or information influence middle managers and, in turn, institutional decisions.
Theoretical Proposition #1: Some aspects of the culture of the institution can be observed and described.
Theoretical Proposition #2: The assumptions individuals hold regarding what does or does not count as knowledge or information can be observed and described. 8
Theoretical Proposition #3: The perceptions and assumptions of middle managers will affect the types of information and activities these individuals employ as they carry out their job duties.
Theoretical Proposition #4: Middle managers will exert some form of upward influence, whether intended or not, as a result of their information processing activities.
To summarize, this research attempts to understand the cognitions that middle managers hold regarding information and organizational knowledge, especially as these relate to their work roles. This research also addresses the means by which non-academic middle managers exercise discretion in their work roles. Finally, this study investigates whether the actions that middle managers do or do not take, the ways in which middle managers structure the context of their work, and the processes and information they use to make their own individual decisions significantly affect the kind of information they supply to institutional decision makers.
Methodological Framework
To understand how non-academic middle managers structure the context of their work roles and operate within the larger institutional culture, it is necessary to collect data in a manner that illuminates their subjective experiences. Furthermore, in order to understand how information provided by middle managers affects 9
institutional decision making, I interviewed individuals who occupy formal decision making roles within the institution. Therefore, an interpretive approach, using the case study technique to investigate the institutional culture and decision-making process at a higher education institution in the Midwest, was used in this research.
Participants: Middle Managers
Four non-academic middle managers from three different administrative departments were interviewed and observed during this study. The criteria by which these middle managers were chosen was two-fold: they were not involved in or part of the institution’s formal policy- or decision-making process and they were responsible for collecting, analyzing, and reporting or providing feedback on information to individuals who were part of the formal decision-making process for the institution.
In selecting non-academic middle managers for the study, close attention was paid to a variety of personal characteristics. An equal number of male and female administrators were included to assess whether an individual’s gender plays a role in the how they perceive the institution and structure their work. Administrators with varying tenure were included in the belief that the length of time someone serves the institution may affect perceptions and performance. Middle managers who varied with regard to both chronological age and also "age" within their career were selected to investigate the experiences of younger administrators relative to 10 their older counterparts. This study includes observations of whether "new" middle managers view their experiences differently than those who are nearer to retirement.
After identifying the non-academic middle managers who met the criteria for this study, their actions and physical work environment were observed and extensive interviews were conducted. The interviews focused on how these individuals: (1) perceive the institution and their role within it, (2) decide which information to analyze and how the analysis will be done, (3) choose and establish informal relationships with staff and faculty members in order to obtain or process information, (4) choose how to report information to those who are in formal decision-making roles, and (5) perform the duties and functions of their roles.
Participants: Decision-Makers
Four individuals in formal decision-making roles ("decision-makers") were also interviewed regarding their use of the information provided by the middle managers. These decision-makers were individuals whose formal job duties specifically defined their involvement in institutional decisions and policy making and included top administrators in the President’s Cabinet. The university’s president and the chair of the institution’s self-study team also served as key informants.
Decision-makers were interviewed with the intention of identifying how job performance and information provided by middle managers affected institutional 11 decisions. In addition, the decision makers provided information regarding their own perceptions of information, and their working relationships with their middle managers.
Documentary Analysis
Institutional publications, such as the catalog, self-study report, alumni magazines, and several development brochures, were examined to gain a historical and contextual understanding of the college chosen for this study. Memoranda, reports, and other correspondence were also scrutinized to see how middle managers treated information and described their work situation. Finally, formal reports issued by the institution were examined to investigate how the information supplied
»•**- by non-academic middle managers influenced institutional decisions and policies.
Research Site
The site for the study was a private university in the Midwest. The president and staff of the institution refer to it as a "multi-purpose" university; hence, the pseudonym for the research site in this study is "Multi-Purpose Midwestern
University", or "Midwestern" for short.
The age of the institution, as well as a sufficiently large and stable enrollment, has enabled the development of a distinct cohort of professional and administrative staff members whose numbers are fairly constant. Midwestern 12 installed a new president in the mid-1980s, and only one major change has occurred among the top administration in the four years prior to the start of this study.
However, just after the research began, one Vice-President resigned and was replaced by an interim Vice-President, who later took the post on a permanent basis.
Another senior administrator was named to the newly-created position of Vice-
President for Planning during the study.
The university academic calendar is based on two semesters. Observations and interviews began in the middle of the spring semester, 1993, and continued through the summer and fall of that same year. A fairly typical range of issues and decisions were attended to by observing and interviewing participants during this time frame.
Significance of the Study
An understanding of the role of collegiate middle managers in their institutions is needed due to the growth, both in raw numbers and in proportion, of individuals employed as administrators at American universities and colleges.
Grassmuck (1991) reported that non-teaching staff members were hired at nearly twice the rate of faculty hires throughout the 1980s. Between 1985 and 1989-90 the number of "executive, administrative, and managerial employees" at American institutions increased by 14.1%, while "other employees", including "accountants, athletics coaches, bookkeepers, fund raisers, lawyers, and systems analysts" 13
(Grassmuck, 1991, p. A22) increased by 28.1%. During the same time period the number of faculty members increased by just 8.6% (Grassmuck, 1991).
The growth of collegiate administration is not a new phenomenon, however.
Scott (1978) noted in higher education literature that the increase in size of administrative staffs between 1929 and the mid-1960s was also cause for concern.
Some of the issues raised by Scott (1978) over 20 years ago are still relevant today:
[RJising costs make college administration an area we need to know more about, but there are other reasons. One is the manner in which mid-level administrators perform their tasks in support of an institution’s goals and in control of its activities (p. 6).
In addition, as Grossman & Ross (1991) have noted, greater demands for accountability in the management of colleges and universities increase the need to understand middle managers and "how they perform basic management functions"
(p. 84). Thus, an examination of collegiate middle management’s work experiences, including the involvement in decision- and policy-making processes, is still pertinent to higher education today.
Focus and Limitations of the Study
Three distinct categories of administrators are evident in American higher education: academic administrators, student services administrators, and operations administrators. The first two categories focus on curriculum and instruction and student life, respectively, while the third branch of administration concentrates more 14 on providing support services and coordinating day-to-day operations for the institution.
The focus of this research was on administrators in both student life and operations areas. This research is especially interested in those individuals who make collegiate administration their major career focus. Scott (1978) calls these individuals the college and university "middle managers." They are responsible for a wide range of administrative operations in their institutions such as admissions, financial aid, physical plant, institutional research, development, and the budget.
Collegiate middle managers, and administrators in general, are important to institutional functioning because, as Fetterman (1990) noted, "In an educational institution, management is the support mechanism that enables departments to pursue their given academic mission successfully" (p. 20).
The findings of this study are not intended to be generalized to other colleges and universities. Both the research approach and the topic investigated lend themselves to specific situations and contexts. Kuh & Whitt (1988) note that
" [Cjulture is bound to a context" (p. 13), and, since each institution’s context is different, the " [Descriptions and interpretations of events and actions from one institution are not generalizable to other institutions" (p. 13).
Nevertheless, every effort is made to render thorough and complete details and descriptions of the participants and their environment. Thus, after reading this study, the reader should have both the information needed to evaluate the current study and a well-founded view as to the worthiness of conducting similar research at another institution. CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE
Collegiate Middle Managers
When writing about institutional management, higher education culture, or decision- and policy-making processes, most researchers comment on faculty, students, presidents, and governing boards. However, many writers on this topic neglect to mention administrators at any level within the institution (Beach, 1985;
Dill, 1982), or touch briefly on the topic (Corson, 1975; Kuh & Whitt, 1988;
Stroup, 1966).
Middle managers and administrative and professional staff members may receive little attention because the term "administrator" is rarely defined. Some researchers refer specifically to collegiate middle managers in the title or text of their studies (Austin, 1984; Freeman & Roney, 1978; Hohenstein & Williams,
1974; Kemerer & Baldridge, 1976; Sagaria, 1986; Scott, 1978 ). However, other authors use the term "administrator" to include department chairpersons, deans, presidents and their staff members, food service personnel, and academic or student services staff members, as well as "middle managers" (Beach, 1985; Chacko, 1990;
16 17
Corson, 1975; Eble, 1978; Kemerer & Baldridge, 1976; Plante, 1990; Singleton,
1987; Stroup, 1966; Veysey, 1965; Whetten & Cameron, 1985).
Several terms are used in higher education literature to refer to collegiate
middle managers (Scott, 1978): mid-level administrators (Austin, 1984, 1985;
Sagaria, 1986; Scott, 1979), non-academic administrators or personnel (Sutherland,
1972, 1973), non-teaching or non-faculty staff members (Freeman & Roney, 1978),
middle-level nonacademic administrators (Bess & Lodahl, 1969), and non-faculty
non-classified university employees (Hohenstein & Williams, 1974).
To further confuse the issue, Reyes & Smith (1987) used the seemingly
contradictory term of "general professional academic staff" or "academic support professional staff" to refer to individuals involved in developing and implementing policy, supporting the teaching and research objectives of the institution, or teaching
on a limited and temporary basis.
While the terminology may vary, two aspects of collegiate middle managers are clear. First, while research on collegiate middle managers has been relatively
sparse compared to other facets of American higher education, researchers seem to be in general agreement as to which positions within the academy qualify for
membership. Bess & Lodahl (1969) appear to have been the first researchers to refer to middle managers in higher education, but Scott’s (1978) definition of this
staff category is one with which most other authors agree. Mid-level administrators
are 18
[T]he deans and directors of support services to whom their assistants and first-line, most often nonexempt, supervisors report, and who themselves report to or are an officer at the vice-presidential level. I do not include presidents or provosts because they typically come from the faculty, have not been career administrators, have status that sets them apart from other administrators, and are the senior officers. I exclude academic deans, department chairmen, and librarians for similar reasons (Scott, 1978, p. 3).
Scott (1978, 1979) further noted that middle managers fulfill three primary functions for their institutions. First, they act as intermediaries with suppliers of financial, human or material resources. Second, they determine how resources should be allocated, with special concern for requirements placed on the institution from external sources. Finally, they assist students in their transition to and through the institution.
Austin (1984) rounded out this definition by noting that middle administrators in academe "link vertical and horizontal levels of their organizations and interact with diverse constituencies" (p. 3) such as faculty, parents, students, senior administrators, trustees, and alumni. This concept would appear to echo Liken’s
(1961; in Chacko, 1990) "linking pin" concept, wherein "Every administrator is a member of two face-to-face work groups: the group for which he or she is responsible and the group to which he or she reports" (p. 263).
Montgomery (1990), also, seemed to view the position of collegiate middle managers as something of a delicate balance between upper levels of administration and the rest of the institution as a whole. As a result, he referred to middle managers as assuming "a Janus-like stance" (Montgomery, 1990, p. 3). 19
Middle administrators, according to Montgomery (1990), are the experts of the organization. They must deal with the topic or activity of their office on an in- depth basis every day. Senior administrators, by contrast, may have a broader perspective on where and how that office fits in the organization, but are not generally capable of acting in an "expert" capacity. The more expert knowledge the middle manager possesses and uses, and the more crucial that knowledge is to the operation of the office, the greater the influence the middle manager is likely to have. At the same time, Montgomery noted that middle administrators are not generally aware of the extent of their authority.
These attributes of collegiate middle managers are evident in other organizations as well. Kaufman (1981) noted that federal bureau chiefs, who head a particular department or division but are subordinate to Cabinet-level staff, engage in four general types of activities. These are
(1) deciding things, (2) receiving and reviewing intelligence about the state of their own organizations and of the external environment, (3) representing their bureaus to the external environment, and (4) motivating their work forces (Kaufman, 1981, p. 17).
Depending upon the level a middle manager occupies in the hierarchical structure of his or her institution, most if not all of the activities attributed to bureau chiefs can also be used to describe collegiate mid-level administrators.
The second aspect of mid-level administration evident in the literature is that no two authors appear to agree on the level or extent of middle management’s 20 involvement in institutional decision- or policy-making. In fact, it is difficult to locate much research on this topic.
Middle Managers and Decision-Making in Higher Education
Definition of Decision Making
"Governance" and "decision-making" are terms that are sometimes interchanged in the literature in higher education. Schmidtlein (in Peterson & Mets,
1987) noted that the term "governance" is ill-defined, but that it generally refers to
"the structures, policies, and processes that institutions, or systems of institutions, employ to define and carry out their missions" (p. 140). "Decision-making," on the other hand, is defined as a subset of governance and usually describes "the structures, processes, and techniques employed by persons in organizations to make choices among alternative policies and courses of action" (Schmidtlein; in Peterson
& Mets, 1987, p. 140).
Reyes & Smith (1987), on the other hand, view "governance" as "the internal processes and structures" used by individuals and groups as they "participate in and influence institutional decision-making" at institutions of higher education (p. 1).
The definition of "academic governance" used by Reyes & Smith (1987) more closely resembles Schmidtlein’s definition of governance in general, since it involves
"any attempt to establish general principles about how institutions of higher 21 education organize themselves to respond to internal and external influences or constituencies" (p. 1).
Kaufman (1981) likewise needed to develop a definition of decision making that fit the participants he observed. Kaufman focused on decisions
that affect large numbers of people or profoundly affect the lives and well-being of even a few, that arouse people with influence, that involve large amounts of money, or that can shake the bureaus’ reputations and security and effectiveness (p. 19).
While Kaufman acknowledged that myriad decisions are made in the course of everyday work life, he concentrated his research efforts only on those decisions that had an impact on the organization or its surrounding environment.
For the purposes of this research, the term "decision" will be used to reflect those choices made by institutional decision makers that have a perceptible affect on either the institution or the external environment. "Decision making" will refer to the processes and mechanisms by which individuals within the institution make choices or develop or influence policies relating to the institution’s internal and external constituencies and environment.
Information Processing
A key component of the decision making process defined above is that of information processing and exchange. Decisions are not made in a vacuum.
Kaufman (1981) noted that 22
A decision is "made".. .at the instant when consideration of alternative possible courses of action ceases because one of the possibilities is authoritatively adopted and the chain of actions dictated by that alternative begins (p. 18).
In order for that decision to be made, however, decision makers need to identify problems, receive and review relevant information, and evaluate options. These activities were classified by Kaufman (1981) as "the preparation for decision" (p.
19; emphasis in original).
A central thesis of this study is that the preparation activities of middle managers, as they gather, process, evaluate, and transmit information to other individuals or groups, represent the avenue by which mid-level administrators affect institutional decisions. Some researchers (Chacko, 1990; Gabarro & Kotler, 1980;
Mowday, 1978) have stated that the strategies used in handling and transmitting information to one’s supervisor are an important component of upward influence, meaning the ability to influence people in higher positions within the organizational hierarchy. This statement appears to echo that of other researchers, who have noted that "Midlevel administrators control information and thus influence senior administrators" but "they typically do not make institutional policy" (Anselm, 1980;
Scott, 1978a; in Austin, 1984, p. 3).
Montgomery (1990), however, stated that middle managers rarely have ready access to all the information needed in order to solve a problem, and that it may take a great deal of effort to obtain the necessary data. Nevertheless, it has been 23 said of middle managers that "They contribute the essential knowledge without which the key decisions cannot be made, at least not effectively" (Drucker, 1973; in Scott, 1978, p. 5).
Exclusion of Middle Managers From Formal Decision Making
Sutherland (1972) reported that "one segment of the university population has been rather consistently ignored; the non-academic employee has had almost no voice in university affairs" or governance (p. 12). Sutherland further noted that
an extensive search did not reveal any study in which staff employees of an institution of higher education had been asked in any formal way or to any large extent for their opinions and attitudes in matters of university governance (p. 15).
This is a situation that seems not to have changed significantly in the last two decades.
Corson (1975) omitted administrative and professional staff members from most of his comments regarding governance. Faculty and students were specifically included in the decision-making process, as were department chairs, deans, presidents and governing boards. Likewise, Cohen & March (1986) focused on the processes of choice in their discussion of leadership, but did not pay much attention to the participants in the process. When they did refer to "administrators", it was clear that they were addressing their comments to college and university presidents, not to members of middle management. 24
Given the time frame within which Corson (1975) and Cohen and March’s
(1986) original works were published, however, the omission of administrators appears to be more a reflection of the social context than a lack of interest concerning administrators. Both of these texts appeared during a very turbulent time period; faculty members were greatly expanding their participation in collective bargaining, while students were protesting against the "establishment" and demanding the right to participate in institutional governance.
One might assume that the end of the student protest era and the deceleration of faculty organizing would lead to an increased focus on the involvement of other constituencies in campus decision making. This has not been the case, however.
Beach (1985) provides an excellent overview of the development of universities and an in-depth discussion of issues facing American higher education, but the section on governance contains no mention of administrative involvement in institutional decision making. While Beach specifically lists faculty, students, trustees, alumni, public policies, accrediting agencies and college presidents as being essential components of governance in American higher education, administrative and professional staff members are conspicuously absent from his list and the ensuing discussion.
In addition, Reyes and Smith (1987) report, despite their importance to the functioning of college and universities, "few systematic studies have been undertaken 25 to assess their [administrative and professional staff] roles in college governance"
(p. 6).
Inclusion of Middle Managers in Formal Decision Making
Few studies have examined the role of middle managers in institutional decision making. Most of the available research concentrates on the rationale for and operation of formal governance or decision-making structures. One of the primary reasons given for studying staff participation in formal decision-making processes is to understand how such involvement increases staff job satisfaction levels (Austin, 1985). Austin sampled 260 administrators at a large research university and found that both "job" and "environmental" characteristics were positively correlated with the reported level of job satisfaction. Job characteristics, as delineated by Austin, included perceptions of the levels of autonomy, skill variety, and feedback inherent in the position. Autonomy was defined as "The degree to which the job provides substantial freedom, independence, and discretion to the individual scheduling the work and in determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out" (Hackman & Oldham, 1980; in Austin, 1985, p. 8). In reporting her research findings, Austin (1985) stated that "autonomy alone is the single greatest predictor among all variables included in the study" (p. 14).
The environmental characteristics of the job included the employees’ perceptions of the job environment as caring and cooperative, and their involvement 26 in decision making. While Austin (1985) found a slight positive correlation between participation in decision making and job satisfaction, this variable accounted for only two percent of the variance. Austin suggested that mid-level administrators may
[Distinguish between autonomy in their own domain of work and participation in decisions at the level of institutional policy....[Respondents] indicated a much lower perception of the degree to which professional staff are involved in decision making....Perhaps mid-level administrators derive satisfaction from their autonomy within their own domain of responsibility, without expecting a strong role in decision-making at the level of institutional policies (p. 17).
Employee job satisfaction can also have a significant impact on institutional costs. Freeman & Roney (1978) note that lack of power and feelings of alienation lead to job dissatisfaction, which in turn may result in "poor performance, absenteeism, and turnover" (p. 22). Given tighter budgets, funding cutbacks, and increased public demand for accountability, the issue of staff satisfaction takes on greater importance.
Job dissatisfaction can also lead to increased employee turnover, which can be expensive, both in a financial sense and in terms of lower organizational morale.
If a university must constantly recruit, hire and train staff members in order to maintain its level of services to students, faculty, and the community, fewer resources will be available for academic support and other programs necessary to the institution’s mission. Likewise, if employees experience enough job dissatisfaction, they may choose to unionize (state laws permitting). The costs of 27 collective bargaining could far exceed the costs required to implement programs that would boost employee morale and job satisfaction.
Several authors (Austin, 1985; Bess & Lodahl, 1969; Whetten & Cameron,
1985) have noted that administrative performance is a critical issue for higher education. In their research, Whetten & Cameron (1985) state that
[T]he effectiveness of colleges and universities is highly dependent on the effectiveness of administrators....The most powerful predictor of organizational effectiveness in colleges and universities is administrative behavior (pp. 35-36).
Participants in Whetten and Cameron’s (1985) research indicate that administrators appear to have significant decision-making power within the institution. As Whetten and Cameron note,
[FJaculty members will often criticize the campus administration for being secretive and imperialistic in its decision making activities....By and large most faculty members want to be kept informed and feel that they can have input on important decisions... (p. 44).
These comments seem to indicate that Whetten and Cameron view administrators as making most institutional decisions, and then communicating these decisions to other campus constituencies. Unfortunately for the present study, however, the organizational level of administration to which these participants refer is not defined.
Bess and Lodahl (1969) remarked that ”[T]he modern university cannot exist without full-time and highly skilled administrators" (p. 220). Similarly, Austin
(1985) recognized the crucial role collegiate middle managers play in institutional functioning and effectiveness. She contended that the job satisfaction of mid-level 28 managers is important because "the way in which they perceive and experience their work may have implications for the institution" (Austin, 1985, p. 3). Austin (1984) has also noted that "The manner in which [college and university administrators] implement policies determine not only the daily operations of a college or university but also its future" (p. 1).
Despite the recognition that middle managers and administrators can greatly influence the operations of their institutions, few writers address the issue of staff participation in decision making. Corson (1975) writes about the governance process for colleges and universities, yet only the final chapter includes any specific mention of administrators and professional staff members. The chapters entitled
"The Distribution of Authority for Governance" and "Leadership in the College or
University" discuss faculty and students and department chairs, deans, presidents, and governing boards, respectively; neither chapter includes administrators or professional staff.
Corson (1975) identifies two problems that must be addressed if colleges and universities want to restructure their governance processes. The first dilemma, labeled the "bifurcation problem" (Corson, 1975), results from the division of the institution into two segments, one dealing with academic matters and the other with business and operational affairs. Over time, the business and operational offices of institutions begin to assemble information regarding the functioning of the academic side of their institutions, and also increasingly control appropriations. This leads to 29 a worsening of relations between academic and administrative personnel. The bifurcation problem is further complicated by the traditional view of faculty that administrative staff are less educated, hold different values, and come from backgrounds that are significantly different from those of faculty (Corson, 1975).
The second problem, according to Corson (1975), is that of "vertical elongation." As a result of increasing enrollments, expansion of activities offered, and increased centralization of authority for state governing boards, an increasing number of decisions must be made by the institution. This leads to an increase in the number of staff members required, and adds layers of institutional administration. While intelligent, educated people expect to be able to exercise some amount of independent thought and creativity, the effect of vertical elongation is that
"decisions are more often made by faceless officials removed by four or five echelons, and perhaps by the distance to the state capital" (Corson, 1975, p. 278).
However, Corson continues this discussion by focusing on the effects of vertical elongation on the faculty rather than the administrative staff. He notes that distance from the locus of decision-making may explain increased levels of unionization, and may account for feelings of alienation among faculty members (Corson, 1975).
Corson’s (1975) text was published the same year that the American
Association of University Administrators, formed in 1970, issued its statement of
"Professional Standards for Administrators in Higher Education." This statement, divided into sections outlining both the rights and responsibilities of administrators, 30 asserts that "An Administrator has the responsibility to participate according to the nature and authority of the office in the formulation and implementation of institutional policy" (American Association of University Administrators [AAUA],
1988, p. 4). Administrators, according to the AAUA, also have several rights regarding policy formulation:
An Administrator has the right to a supportive institutional setting for the proper operation of the office held... An Administrator has the right to adequate authority to the extent necessary to meet the responsibilities of the office... An Administrator has the right to participate, according to the nature and authority of the office and within the limitations of the area of responsiblity [sic], in the formulation and implementation of institutional policy (AAUA, 1988, p. 5).
The issue of how to involve non-academic staff in institutional decision making remains unclear, however. Wright (1986; in Reyes & Smith, 1987) "found that academic staff participation in institutional policy-making tends to be determined, both in form and the degree of participation, by faculty members" (p.
5). Reyes and Smith (1987) believe that, overall, "academic staff plays [sic] essential and active roles in the governance of colleges and universities; however, few systematic studies have been undertaken to assess their roles in college governance" (pp. 5-6). 31
Informal Roles and Structures
One aspect of participation in decision making that is not generally addressed in the literature is that of informal roles and structures for middle managers. As noted previously, collegiate administrators in general, and middle managers in particular, often have little voice in the formal decision-making process of their institution. Yet, non-academic middle managers make countless decisions each day that have an impact on institutional functioning. More importantly, the information processing activities of middle managers helps to shape the range of options that may be developed to deal with a specific issue, and also frames how institutional decision makers will view the situation or problem.
However, relatively few of these decisions made by middle managers as they process information or act on everyday matters pass through any sort of formal mechanism. Since there appear to be few avenues for formal participation by middle managers in institutional decisions, it is time to investigate the implications of informal processes on the decisions made by colleges and universities.
Upward Influence
A relatively small body of literature, largely from the fields of business, sociology, and political science, has arisen in the past 20 years to deal with the topic of upward influence. The basic definition of "upward influence" includes any 32
"attempts to influence someone higher in the formal hierarchy of authority in the organization" (Porter, Allen & Angle, 1981, p. 111).
While some authors (Porter et al., 1981) ascribe political—by which they mean competitive-motivations to upward influence attempts, other researchers
(Chacko, 1990; Gabarro & Kotler, 1984; Kipnis, Schmidt, Swaffin-Smith &
Wilkinson, 1984; Schilit & Locke, 1982) note that these activities are part of the normal interaction process between managers and subordinates. One dimension of all these studies, however, is the impact that information control and the flow of information has on a subordinate’s ability to exercise upward influence. These information flows include both formal and informal methods for processing and providing information and data to others.
There are several components to the concept of "upward influence." Middle managers attempting to exercise upward influence must make "strategic decisions about who is to be influenced and" also must decide "when and how influence is to be exercised" (Michener & Burt, 1975; in Mowday, 1978, p. 138). In part, these decisions may be based on the subordinate’s interpretation and understanding of the culture of the institution or organization. Porter et al. (1981), for example, specifically address organizational and situational factors affecting influence strategies. Among these factors are the political and organizational norms, the organizational structure, and patterns of control (Porter et al., 1981). 33
Mowday (1978) appears to provide a starting point for other researchers on the topic of upward influence and related strategies. Mowday (1978) listed five different methods that might be used in exercising upward influence:
(1) threats, (2) legitimate authority, (3) persuasive arguments, (4) rewards or exchange of favors, and (5) providing information in such a way that the recipient is not aware he or she is being influenced. Following Gilman (1962) and Tedeschi, Schlenker, and Linkskold (1972), the last method of influence was interpreted as manipulation (pp. 142-143; emphasis added).
Later researchers (Porter et al., 1981; Kipnis et al., 1984) added to
Mowday’s (1978) original list. Kipnis et al. (1984) identified seven possible strategies for influencing upward. While some of these methods are similar to those listed by Mowday, there are nonetheless some important differences. The list developed by Kipnis et al. (1984) includes: (1) reason, or the use of data and information to persuade others, (2) friendliness and goodwill gestures, (3) establishing a coalition or mobilizing others in the organization, (4) bargaining and negotiation, including exchange of favors, (5) assertiveness, which means using "a direct and forceful approach" (p. 61), (6) obtaining support from higher authorities in order to support one’s position or request, and (7) sanctions, which would include granting or withholding institutional rewards.
The informal information processing activities of middle managers to some extent may depend on the nature of the relationship and the information preferences exhibited by their supervisors. Astute managers to some degree will learn how to manage their bosses or "manage upward" (Gabarro & Kotler, 1980, p. 94); this 34
includes learning how to manage information in a way that will enhance both the middle manager’s and the boss’s effectiveness.
Subordinates can adjust their styles in response to their bosses’ preferred method for receiving information. Peter Drucker divides bosses into "listeners" and "readers." Some bosses like to get information in report form so that they can read and study it. Others work better with information and reports presented in person so they can ask questions. As Drucker points out, the implications are obvious. (Gabarro & Kotler, 1980; p. 98)
Supervisors will vary with respect to how much information they want regarding a subordinate’s activities. The amount of information requested may depend on the context of the situation and the level of confidence or trust the supervisor has toward the subordinate.
It is not uncommon for a boss to need more information than the subordinate would naturally supply or for the subordinate to think the boss knows more than he [sic] really does. Effective [middle] managers recognize that they probably underestimate what the boss needs to know and make sure they find ways to keep him [sic] informed through a process that fits his [sic] style. (Gabarro & Kotler, 1980, pp. 99-100).
This includes finding ways to share both good and bad news, as the welfare of the organization may depend on the overall level of understanding held by the decision regarding any particular situation or problem.
Decision making styles also vary. Some bosses want and expect high levels of involvement; subordinates need to keep their supervisors apprised constantly, even if on an informal basis. Other supervisors tend to delegate and will expect to be involved only if important items or issues arise. 35
Mowday (1978) found "that influence effectiveness was related to the likelihood of using manipulation and persuasion" and further noted "the importance of information as a resource in exercising influence" (p. 154). While the choices made regarding the transmission of information might differ in various circumstances, Mowday notes "that the ability to control the content of information selectively is an important aspect of effectiveness in exercising influence" (p. 154).
Schilit and Locke (1982) found that information, as demonstrated by the
"Logical or rational presentation of ideas" (p. 305) was listed as the strategy most often-used by the middle managers and subordinates in their study. In addition, subordinates may use either direct or indirect methods of influence, meaning that they may or may not involve other individuals or use formal or informal exchanges to obtain their objectives. For the most part, however, the subordinates in the study appeared to approach their supervisors directly when attempting to exercise upward influence (Schilit & Locke, 1982).
There were also differences noted in the type of strategy or influence method used, depending upon organizational structure. Schilit & Locke (1982) stated that
"Workers in small or private organizations used informal methods of upward influence" (p. 314) more often than did employees of large or public organizations.
Thus, it appears that organizational factors, such as size and institutional control, may play a role in the subordinate’s choice of upward influence strategies. 36
Chacko (1990) likewise found that middle managers tended to use "reason" most often in their attempts to influence upward. By "reason," Chacko (1990) was referring to
an upward influence strategy whereby facts and logical arguments are used to support requests. Administrators who use reason try to persuade their supervisors on the basis of the merits of the request and rely on data and information to support their requests (p. 261).
The second most dominant strategy, in Chacko’s (1990) study, was that of coalition building. This is a strategy wherein the middle manager will obtain the support of other interested parties within the organization; the group then attempts to exert upward influence (Chacko, 1990). Both reason and coalition-building were considered non-threatening methods. In each of these strategies, subordinates tend not to aggressively pursue their goals; rather, they attempt to persuade and influence decision makers in more subtle ways.
From the foregoing discussion, it appears that both the information strategies and the informal or coalition-building activities of subordinates are worthy of examination in the current study. In addition, various aspects of the institution itself, such as its culture, norms, and size, should be of importance in studying the choices and strategies used by middle managers as they provide the information used in the decision-making process. 37
Organizational Culture
An investigation such as the one developed in this study is important because it may help to increase the understanding of organizational culture as it appears in the behavior, decisions, and effectiveness of an academic institution. Tierney (1988) stated that
As decision-making contexts grow more obscure, costs increase, and resources become more difficult to locate, leaders in higher education can benefit from understanding their institutions as cultural entities (p. 5).
The relationship between organizational culture and upward influence strategies was discussed briefly in the preceding section. An organizational culture perspective, which takes into account the norms, beliefs, and environment of the institution as it impacts on the individuals within the organization, may be the most helpful approach for describing and understanding how middle managers affect institutional decisions and operations.
While researchers over the years in different disciplines have promoted a variety of concepts regarding culture, interest in organizational and institutional culture increased significantly with the advent of Japanese manufacturing successes in the 1970s and 1980s (Kuh & Whitt, 1988). A virtual explosion of research and writing on organizational and institutional culture occurred in the early 1980s and continues to this day. Many authors have written extensive texts and articles regarding culture in organizations (Kuh & Whitt, 1988; Morgan, 1986; Ott, 1989;
Schein, 1985; Smircich, 1983a), so an extended discussion is not necessary in this 38 section. Instead, the next section will concentrate on the literature and issues that seem most relevant to understanding organizational culture in higher education.
Definitions of Organizational Culture
The most immediate concern in dealing with a research project that includes an organizational culture perspective is to identify or develop a definition of
"culture" to be used in the study. As with the term "administrator," no one clear definition emerges from the literature. The lack of one commonly accepted definition appears to be a reflection of epistemology. Kuh & Whitt (1988) appear to have echoed some of these sentiments when they wrote that "Almost as many definitions of culture exist as scholars studying the phenomenon" (p. iii). Wolcott
(1985) notes that culture is an "intriguing but elusive" concept (p. 191); indeed, the very elusiveness of "culture" may lead some authors to question its importance in modern research.
Since 1979, however, there seems to have been a move toward consolidation on the topic of organizational culture. In his article, Pettigrew (1979) suggests that researchers focus less on the rational aspects of tasks and organizations, and more on "[T]he more expressive tissue around us that gives those tasks meaning" (p. 574).
He notes that people need to be able to develop "[A] continuing sense of what..reality is all about in order to be acted upon" (Pettigrew, 1979, p. 574).
Thus, one of the functions of organizational culture is to give group members a 39 framework by which they can make sense of their situation. The culture of an organization is therefore "[T]he system of such publicly and collectively accepted meanings operating for a given group at a given time. This system of terms, forms, categories, and images interprets a people’s own situation to themselves" (Pettigrew,
1979, p. 574).
In reviewing two books on Japanese management techniques and their implications for American firms, Schein (1981) discusses his views on organizational culture and listed his definition of the levels of culture. At the surface level are
Artifacts and Creations, which are the most easily observed manifestations of culture. However, without understanding the second level, Values and Ideology, or the most basic foundational level, Underlying Assumptions and Premises, Schein
(1981) felt that it would be impossible to comprehend and appropriately interpret an organization’s artifacts and creations.
At the same time, Schein (1981) notes that, because we are embedded in our own culture, we often cannot tell what the culture is or how our behaviors reflect the cultural context. He writes that "[W]e probably cannot really understand another culture at the level of its basic world view. The only one we can really understand is our own" (Schein, 1981, p. 64; emphasis in original). However, even understanding our own culture is difficult and requires a great deal of analysis since
"One cannot suddenly become aware of something and understand it if one has taken it completely for granted" (Schein, 1981, p. 64). 40
In subsequent writing Schein (1985) further refines his definition of culture as "[A] pattern of basic assumptions...developed by a given group as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal integration" (p. 9). Thus, as an identifiable group is established in order to achieve some end and also to deal with its external environment, certain assumptions will prevail. When these assumptions have been developed and used successfully over a long time period, the assumptions themselves will become taken for granted and will no longer be consciously considered by individuals within the group (Schein, 1985).
Chaffee and Tierney (1988) and Kuh and Whitt (1988) each define organizational culture as being shared, interpreted and negotiated among the members of the institution, with behaviors developed based on those shared values and underlying assumptions. Chaffee and Tierney (1988) further identify "the three general dimensions of culture" as " structure, environment and values" (p. 7; emphasis in original). These dimensions are highly interrelated and interdependent.
The structural dimension focuses on how the institution accomplishes its objectives and includes activities related to programming, finance, and governance.
The formal hierarchical structure and informal networks for communication are also part of this dimension. The second dimension, the environment, should be divided into two parts according to Chaffee and Tierney (1988). The "environment" is
"[T]he objective context of people, events, demands, and constraints in which an institution finds itself" while the "enacted environment" is "[T]he understanding 41 organization members develop about the nature of the organization’s context" (p.
20). The latter perspective focuses on the socially constructed and culturally defined aspects of the organization’s environment. Finally, the value dimension encompasses the shared norms, beliefs and priorities of institutional members.
Three themes run through each dimension of culture. They are time, space, and communication. "Time" refers to institutional history and traditions, which develop over time and become more salient to individuals as time passes. Time is also used to measure activities, both in the present and in the future. "Space" can be both instrumental and symbolic, and can provide important information regarding the institution’s values, structure, and environment. An example would be the location of key buildings on campus; if athletic facilities occupy a central location, with academic buildings on the periphery, this gives some indication of the relative importance of sports over academics at that institution.
The third theme, "communication", is "the primary vehicle through which members perceive and interpret their world" (Chaffee & Tierney, 1988), and is a crucial aspect of organizational functioning and institutional culture. How communication occurs is an important clue to the organization’s culture. A reliance on informal information exchanges and conversation may indicate a more open and relaxed environment, while emphasis on written or formal communication patterns can indicate a less trusting or open atmosphere. 42 Kuh and Whitt (1988) built upon the concept of "shared values and assumptions" to develop an inclusive framework for studying institutional culture in higher education. Kuh and Whitt (1988) used four different levels of analysis in their research:
(1) the external environment that surrounds a college or university; (2) the institution itself; (3) subcultures within the institution (e.g., faculty, professional staff) and within subcultures (e.g., faculty in the humanities and the sciences); and (4) individual actors and roles (e.g., university president) (pp. 41-42).
From these different levels, seven "threads" of institutional culture emerged: historical roots and external influences, academic programs, personnel core, social environment, artifacts, distinctive themes, and individual actors. The inclusiveness of the framework was necessary due to the complexity of organizational culture itself. Kuh and Whitt (1988) claimed that the framework needed to be able "to accommodate multiple and sometimes conflicting theoretical positions, such as the phenomenological view from anthropology and the non-rational as well as the rational, structural views from sociology" (p. 41).
The necessity of pursuing a holistic approach to research and writing about organizational culture is emphasized by Ott (1989), who notes that "Organizational culture is a dynamic social construction....a reality created by its members" (p.
190). As a result, "Organizational culture is holistic" and "needs to be examined both structurally and functionally (dynamically)" (p. 190). Ott (1989) also adapted
Schein’s (1985) concept of the levels of culture by adding an intermediate level. 43
Thus, Ott’s (1989) framework for the levels of organizational culture can be represented as follows:
IA Artifacts IB Patterns of Behavior II Values and Beliefs III Basic Underlying Assumptions
The aspects of organizational behavior and culture studied by researchers will depend both on what they perceive organizational culture to be, and where they perceive it to be occurring (Ott, 1989).
Peterson and Spencer (1990) discuss the concepts of both organizational culture and organizational climate. The distinction between these two concepts, according to Peterson and Spencer (1990), is that organizational "culture....focuses on the deeply embedded patterns of organizational behavior and the shared values, assumptions, beliefs, or ideologies that members have about their organization or its work" (p.6); organizational climate, on the other hand, is based on the organization’s culture and tends to be more focused and specific. The climate of the organization is demonstrated through attitudes and behaviors, which in turn are a result of the culture.
In addition, Peterson and Spencer (1990) discuss the implications of culture and climate on organizational research. Returning to an earlier question, Peterson and Spencer (1990) note the debate over whether culture is something an organization "is" or something that it "has." If culture is something the institution
"is", then culture can only be understood or interpreted from the perspective of its 44
members; fixed-response instruments, surveys, and similar assessment devices will not be able to capture the individual perspective.
If culture is something an institution "has", however, the researcher can
"apply his or her own interpretation to the pattern of functioning that is being described" (Peterson & Spencer, 1990, p. 14). According to Peterson and Spencer
(1990), the researcher would then be able to predetermine what aspects to investigate and could use surveys or other similar instruments in their study.
Peterson and Spencer (1990) identify four general approaches for categorizing organizational culture; in so doing, they appear to have combined the frameworks of Chaffee and Tierney (1988), Kuh and Whitt (1988), and Ott (1989). The four approaches are "geospatial; traditions, myths, artifacts and symbolism; behavioral patterns and processes; and espoused versus embedded values and beliefs" (Peterson
& Spencer, 1990, pp. 9-10). The geospatial category relates physical traces and visible elements to the history, shared meanings, and traditions of the institution.
Examples of this category include walkways and statues, campus buildings and landscaping, and the physical layout of the campus itself. This clearly relates to
Chaffee and Tierney’s (1988) themes of "space" and "time" as they relate to culture.
Traditions, myths and artifacts seem to link Ott’s (1989) level IA Artifacts with Kuh and Whitt’s (1988) institutional layer and Chaffee and Tierney’s (1988) value dimension and "time" theme. By observing an institution’s language, ceremonies, and sagas, a researcher is investigating the traditions, myths and 45 artifacts of the organization. Peterson and Spencer (1990) note that traditions, myths and artifacts usually illustrate an idealized version of the organization and tend to focus on the "values and beliefs that are avowed but not necessarily practiced" (p. 11).
Similarly, Chaffee and Tierney (1988) note that "values" refers to the beliefs and norms regarding the institution that are held collectively by participants. One of the best indicators of institutional values and priorities is the mission statement.
How the institution defines its mission, as well as whether the mission is actually used as a foundation for institutional decisions and policies, is an important indicator of the institution’s culture.
Peterson and Spencer’s (1990) category of behavior patterns and processes seems to correspond to Ott’s (1989) level IB Patterns of Behavior and Chaffee and
Tierney’s (1988) structural dimension. Each of these concepts examines behaviors that have endured over time and that may be either formally or informally defined.
Lastly, the embedded values and beliefs category (Peterson & Spencer, 1990) closely resembles the Schein (1985) and Ott (1989) concept of basic underlying assumptions, the "distinctive themes" portion of Kuh and Whitt’s (1988) institutional level of analysis, and Chaffee and Tierney’s (1988) dimensions of "enacted" environment and values. Embedded values can be explicitly stated, as in mission statements and institutional charters, or may be implicit and "revealed only through members’ actions" (Peterson & Spencer, 1990, p. 11). Embedded values often 46 reflect organizational "reality" as it is experienced by members of the organizations and can act as a guide in day-to-day actions.
Knowledge and Organizational Culture
Another significant theme that has recently been addressed is that of
"knowledge" and its relationship to organizational culture (Sackmann, 1991, 1992).
Sackmann (1991; 1992) proposes a different type of framework to use when examining organizational culture, and used this framework to examine and develop a model for the cultural knowledge of a large insurance corporation.
Sackmann’s framework formed the basis for this study. Accordingly, a more thorough explication of Sackmann’s model for examining an organization’s culture through the cultural knowledge of its members is contained in Chapter Four. The relevance of Sackmann’s (1991; 1992) framework, and its usefulness for the present study, will also be discussed in that chapter. CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Ethnographic Research Perspective
The choice of the particular research questions addressed in this study means that both the research design and data-gathering techniques need to be qualitatively focused. Due to the focus on organizational culture and individual experience that permeates the study, the use of an ethnographic perspective in the collection and analysis of data is most reasonable. Indeed, Wolcott (1985) states that a focus on cultural understanding "is the essence of the ethnographic endeavor" (p. 190), while
Fetterman (1989) claims that "Ethnography is the art and science of describing a group or culture" (p. 11). Patton (1990) similarly notes that "The critical assumption guiding ethnographic inquiry is that every human group that is together for a period of time will evolve a culture" (pp. 67-68).
A case study strategy was utilized in order to obtain information about middle managers and their actions and communication within the institution. Since the focus of this research is on "how" middle managers impacted policy within a real- life setting, the case study is the most appropriate research method (Yin, 1989).
The definition of a case study, according to Yin, is
47 48
an empirical inquiry that: investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple sources of evidence are used (p. 23).
By concentrating upon a limited number of individuals at one specific institution, a deep level of understanding and a rich vein of information was obtained that can be used to describe and analyze the influence of middle managers on institutional decision making.
Research Site
Multi-Purpose Midwestern University is a private, comprehensive institution located in a mid-western state. Current enrollment for the institution is approximately 3,000, and includes both on-campus and off-campus learning sites.
At present, graduate enrollment exceeds undergraduate enrollment by about 600 students. The majority of undergraduate students live in university housing.
Midwestern competes with several nearby institutions for students and also for development funds. The university is affiliated with a religious denomination, and several members of the denomination’s clergy are members of the institution’s
Board of Trustees.
The institution installed a new president in 1988, and relatively few major changes among the top administration have been made recently. Thus, the senior administration and leadership of the institution remains fairly constant. In addition, the institution is undergoing a major campus renovation and capital fund raising 49 effort; part of the background of this effort was the determination, by the university’s faculty, staff, and students, of what makes the institution special or unique. It was therefore assumed that there would be a fairly strong sense of institutional mission and character.
The institution had just completed its self-study and accreditation team visit from the regional accrediting body as entree with the university president was being negotiated. Copies of the institution’s self-study report were provided by both the president and the Chair of the self-study committee. This report outlined both the strengths and problem areas for the institution, and identified areas on which the university intended to concentrate its efforts and resources in the future.
The age and size of the institution, its ties to a religious denomination, and its renewed focus on its unique qualities helped in observing and analyzing aspects of the institution’s culture (Masland, 1985). These factors also helped illustrate the meaning that the culture had for individual staff members as they performed their duties.
Another factor that helped in observing Midwestern’s culture and aided in the interviews was the fact that I had been employed by the university during the 1980s.
I was familiar with some of the history of the institution and had at least a passing acquaintance with most of the individuals who participated in the interviews and research. While I had not been present on Midwestern’s campus for a number of years prior to the study, I was not considered an "outside" researcher. These 50 factors aided in gaining entree to the university for research, and also helped in obtaining information and materials for use in the study.
Holistic and Embedded Research
Sample size is usually the focus of some discussion regarding qualitative research, especially with regard to the case study approach (McClintock, 1985;
Wolcott, 1985; Yin, 1989). Survey sampling and experimental research designs strive for representative samples that will permit the researcher to make generalizations with a specified level of confidence (Ary, Jacobs & Razavieh, 1990;
Yin, 1989). The logic of external validity is based upon a larger sample size (Judd,
Smith & Kidder, 1991) than those typically found in qualitatively-oriented research projects.
Researchers in anthropology have generally utilized case studies with limited numbers of participants (Wolcott, 1985); researchers in other social science fields have increasingly begun to utilize case studies as well (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982;
Patton, 1990). In applied fields, such as education, the volume of case studies that focus on limited numbers of participants is also growing (Donmoyer, 1985;
McClintock, 1985; Tierney, 1988; Wolcott, 1985).
However, the use of a single site in one’s research does not automatically mean that there will be only be one member in the sample. McClintock (1985) notes that it is the level of analysis that determines sample size; even a single-site 51 study can include multiple observations of the same or similar phenomena. Yin
(1989) refers to this as a distinction between holistic and embedded case study design. Holistic case studies investigate one unit of analysis and focus on "the global nature of the program" (Yin, 1989, p. 49), while embedded designs include subunits within a single case. Thus a single case study may incorporate several
"subunits of analysis, so that a more complex-or embedded-design is developed"
(p. 52).
Donmoyer (1985) and Tierney (1988) included only one organization in their studies, but obtained data by interviewing and observing several individuals at the respective institutions. Wolcott (1985) concentrated on a single individual in his ethnography of a school principal. What these studies may lack in sample size, however, is compensated for by the volume and complexity of data obtained.
Wolcott (1985) concedes that it may seem incongruous to make generalizations about a larger group of people from a relatively small number of observations, but also notes that the ability to do so depends upon the amount and types of information a researcher can obtain from ethnographically-oriented research. Their methods of data gathering, close relationship with research participants, and familiarity with the research site enable ethnographers to make the
"critical distinction between generalizing and overgeneralizing" (p. 197).
Since educational administrators deal primarily with information, it may be helpful for a researcher not to consider the organization as a whole. Rather, as Yin 52
(1989) and McClintock (1985) suggest, this research focuses on multiple instances of information exchange by middle managers within the university. The study thus examines individuals within the institution who process information, and the effect of cultural knowledge on the ways in which information is processed.
Research Participants: Middle Managers
This study utilizes purposeful and "operational construct" sampling (Patton,
1990). The study focuses on a specific group of individuals-middle managers-and investigates whether and how personal attributes affect their information gathering and processing. Additionally, the individuals chosen for this study are meant to represent "real-world examples" (Patton, 1990), as writing about the everyday lives of ordinary people is a hallmark of ethnographic investigation (Fetterman, 1989).
The middle managers chosen for this study were selected as a result of two conversations held with the institution’s president and an examination of the institution’s self-study document, which had been prepared for an accreditation visit by the regional accrediting body. The self-study document addressed areas of special competence or concern for the university, such as curriculum, financial resources, and student services. The participants were chosen from individuals whose job titles matched those considered to be "middle managers" and whose positions were in areas identified by the self-study document as being critical to continued success. 53
Administrative middle managers were selected from the pool of individuals who shared the following characteristics: (1) job title and duties commensurate with the day-to-day operation of the institution, (2) job description that excludes any role in the formal decision-making process of the institution, (3) job requires receipt, handling and transmission of information, and (4) job incumbent reports to an individual or group that is part of the institution’s formal decision-making process.
As indicated previously, personal characteristics such as gender, age, length of service to the university, and the number of years spent in higher education administration played a role in selecting non-academic middle managers for the study. The position title, gender, and length of service to the university of the middle managers who participated in the study are as follows:
Director of Institutional Research, male, 19 years of service Assistant Director of Admissions, female, 5 years of service Director of Residence Life, male, 14 years of service Director of Annual Fund, female, 3 years of service
Research Participants: Decision Makers
The criteria for selecting decision-makers included the following: (1) job title, including President, Vice-Presidents, and Provost, (2) membership in the institution’s formal decision-making network, either as a result of job title, position description, or designation by the Board of Trustees or faculty governance body, and
(3) relationship to middle managers included in the study. The latter criterion refers 54 to individuals who both request information from non-academic middle managers and who receive and utilize the information provided.
Four senior administrators were included in this portion of the study. Their titles were Dean of Assessment, Vice-President for Enrollment Management, Dean of Student Life, and the Vice-President for University Relations.
Data-Gatherine Methods
Interviews. Both unstructured and semi-structured interviews were used as the primary data-gathering technique in this research. Kvale (1983) refers to these as "qualitative research interviews," and notes that the intention of these interviews is "to gather descriptions of the life-world of the interviewee with respect to interpretation of the meaning of the described phenomena" (p. 174). Thus, qualitative research interviews are an excellent tool for research aimed at understanding how individuals structure their lives and negotiate the social reality of an organization.
According to Kvale (1983), qualitative research interviews share the following twelve characteristics: 1) aim to have interviewee describe his or her life- world; 2) require interviewer to understand the meaning of the interviewee’s words and descriptions; 3) strive to obtain "as many nuanced descriptions from the different qualitative aspects of the interviewee’s life-world as possible" (p. 175); 4) obtain description without interpretation; 5) describe specific situations and actions 55 of the interviewee; 6) require openness on the part of the interviewer; 7) focus on a specific aspect of the interviewee’s life-world and experiences; 8) permit ambiguity of responses; 9) allow interviewees to change definitions as a result of reflection on their responses; 10) require sensitivity on the part of the interviewer; 11) occur within an interpersonal context; and 12) provide a positive experience for the interviewee.
The emphasis on the real world, as it is lived and understood by individuals, is also an important aspect of ethnographic research (Fetterman, 1989). This type of research must help the researcher understand and analyze human experience.
This can be accomplished by focusing on the individual’s perception and description of his or her life. Fetterman (1989) outlined an interview strategy that appears to be a practical extension of Kvale’s (1983) qualitative research interview perspective.
While Fetterman (1989) notes that structured interviews may be used at any point in the data-gathering process, he recommends the use of informal interviews at the start of a study. "Informal interviews are the most common" (Fetterman,
1989, p. 48) and they "have a specific but implicit research agenda" (p. 48). The interviewer seeks information about a specific phenomenon, but does not impose this research agenda on the interviewee by asking structured questions that may "lead" the responses. These interviews are useful because they permit the interviewer "to discover the categories of meaning in a culture" (Fetterman, 1989, p. 48). 56
Once these categories become clear, the interviewer can engage in more
structured interviews to clarify issues or compare and contrast perspectives.
Questions of a more specific nature focus on structural or attribute characteristics.
Structural questions center on the physical and social structure of the phenomenon
under study, while attribute questions "ferret out the differences between conceptual
categories" (Fetterman, 1989, p. 53). The two types of questions are usually
alternated, since "information from a structural question might suggest a question
about the differences between various newly identified categories" (Fetterman, 1989, p. 53).
The interview strategy used in this study combines the recommendations of
Fetterman (1989) and Kvale (1983). In order to remain open to the experiences of participants, the research began with unstructured interviews that focused on survey
or "grand tour" questions. As participants discussed and described their
experiences, various themes emerged that related to the ways in which they structure
their work lives. Subsequent interviews used more specific questions to obtain
additional information and check the perceptions of the middle managers’
experiences.
Interview questions. Research of an ethnographic nature must remain open
to change and reinterpretation. In order to obtain an emic or insider’s perspective
(Fetterman, 1989) on how middle managers negotiated and influenced their
institution, specific questions on particular issues were developed in advance. The 57 participants’ responses were probed to follow up on issues as they were raised in the interview sessions. A listing of the interview questions used during this research appears in Appendix A.
On a few occasions, after the interview started, the prepared questions were abandoned because the information being provided by the participant was such that the flow of ideas and reflections would have been inhibited if "canned" questions had been interjected into the conversation. Thus, this study follows Sackmann’s
(1991) suggestion that, rather than imposing or thrusting preconceived notions on research participants, "the categories and conceptions should emerge from the research site" (p. 184).
The issues that provided the context or focus for more structured interviews were identified by examining initial interview data from the president and middle managers. Sackmann (1991) utilized a similar research approach, divided into roughly five phases:
(1) generate insider knowledge, (2) extract themes from the data, (3) further pursue these themes, (4) probe the validity of an emerging hypothesis, and (5) analyze and reanalyze all data collected (p. 185).
Fetterman (1989) outlines a comparable research design for ethnographic investigation, which also emphasizes the importance of fieldwork. Time spent in the field is not only used to gather data; fieldwork is also a means for developing and understanding the issues to be addressed in the study. The process of identifying and refining themes to pursue proceeds inductively (Fetterman, 1989). 58
Thus, the specific issue or context for subsequent interviews and observation were not known prior to the study. However, there were some general questions or themes to be addressed in the research. These themes were based on the research and literature on organizational culture and middle management in higher education.
The themes, and their relationships to the initial research propositions, are stated below. — Proposition# \—Some aspects of the culture of the institution can be observed
— — and described.
What is the mission of the university?
How would a decision about [an important issue] be made?
What are the most important issues or problems facing the university today?
How would you describe Multi-Purpose Midwestern University to someone
who was unfamiliar with this institution?
Proposition #2- The assumptions individuals hold regarding what does or does not count as knowledge or information can be observed and described.
What information do you find valuable in your job?
What do you need to know on a daily basis in order to do your job well?
How do you choose the individuals with whom you communicate or from
whom you obtain information?
Do you tend to communicate with any other middle managers on a daily
basis? 59
Would you say this communication tends to be more formal (e.g., a
scheduled meeting with an agenda) or informal?
Does the setting and type of communication have any bearing on your job
performance?
Do you find one type or style of communication more helpful than another?
Do you have a preference?
Proposition #3~The perceptions and assumptions of middle managers will affect the types of information and activities these individuals employ as they carry out their job duties.
Why do you feel certain types of information are important?
Do you have any control or choice over the data you provide to others?
What role do you see yourself playing in terms of supplying information and
feedback to people in decision-making roles?
How do you decide what form (reports, memos, conversations, etc.) of
information presentation to use when you are giving information to
someone in a decision-making position?
What do you do with the information you obtain from other middle
managers?
Proposition #4—Middle managers will exert some form o f upward influence, whether intended or not, as a result of their information processing activities. 60
Has there ever been a time or occasion when you could control the outcome
of the decision that was ultimately made based on the type of
information you presented to your supervisor?
Do you ever try to provide information in such a way as to support your
position on a particular topic or issue?
Observational research. In addition to interviews, information about the research site was collected by observing the settings in which research participants work. There are several reasons why observation is important for a study such this.
Observation permits a full description of the site, the activities that occur, the participants involved, and the meaning that appears to be attached to those activities
(Patton, 1990). This kind of observation enables the researcher to understand the context in which activities and relationships occurred. Additionally, observation often yields insight into activities or situations that are not apparent to the participants themselves, or which participants do not wish to discuss (Patton, 1990).
Field observation also provides information that can be used in analyzing and evaluating information gathered from interviews. Participants will provide information regarding their perceptions in interviews, but these perceptions are always selective (Patton, 1990). The perceptions of the investigator are also selective, and the inclusion of this information provides a more comprehensive basis for analysis (Patton, 1990). 61
Patton (1990) further notes that "Reflection and introspection are important parts of field research....The observer takes in information and forms impressions that go beyond what can be fully recorded in even the most detailed field notes" (p.
205). Through observation and personal experience, the researcher can gain a more detailed understanding of the life-world of individuals at the research site.
Documentary analysis. Information regarding the institution as a whole was obtained through documents such as the university’s self-study report, catalog, and promotional materials. These written information sources yield information regarding the university’s culture and the image it wishes to project. In addition, middle managers in the study provided copies of memos, letters and reports used in their work. These documents helped in assembling information regarding the types and uses of information among the middle managers.
Documents such as those mentioned above were used largely as background material to gain a greater understanding of the university’s image, history, and means of presenting itself to the world. Letters from the Annual Fund office, admissions mailings, and documents such as the course catalog or institutional self- study report largely supported the image of the university that was presented by participants during the interviews. While these documents were useful in obtaining information about the university, the interview data were much more valuable to this research. 62
Research Time Line
Initial discussions with the Midwestem’s president took place in February and
March, 1993. While the President was not the direct supervisor of any of the middle managers included in the study, his comments became the basis for initial observations.
Middle managers were contacted in mid-April regarding their willingness to participate in the study. The first four individuals contacted agreed to participate in the research. The first round of interviews with middle managers took place between April 16 and April 30, 1993. These conversations ranged from 25 minutes to an hour and a quarter, depending upon the participant. All interviews were tape- recorded and transcribed as soon as possible after the interview. Written and audio taped fieldnotes for each interview and observation session were also made; these notes were also transcribed verbatim.
Transcriptions were entered into the ETHNOGRAPH software program for coding. Coding and code searches of the data occurred continuously; the categories and codes developed following the first round of interviews helped to establish questions for the second round of interviews.
Between the first and second rounds of interviews, I attended the annual end- of-the-year faculty meeting, at which the heads of various departments (both academic and administrative) outlined important events that had occurred during the previous year. In addition to taking several pages of notes during the meeting, I 63 spoke informally with a middle manager after the meeting. This individual was not part of the study, but did chair the institution’s self-study team. This individual clarified some of the information that had been given out in the meeting, and also noted his impressions of some of the general trends that had been noticed in the first-round interviews. Some of the issues discussed during this conversation became the basis for questions in the second round.
The second round of interviews took place between May 17 and June 11,
1993. The length of interviews in this round ranged from approximately forty-five minutes to well over an hour, and again each was recorded and transcribed verbatim.
During July and August I spoke by telephone with the middle managers in the study and obtained copies of memoranda, reports, and similar materials. These two months were spent analyzing the data in preparation for further interview sessions. A brief narrative of each participant was developed (Seidman, 1991).
Details about these narratives appear in Chapter Five.
Senior administrators, also known as the decision makers, were interviewed during between September and December, 1993. These interviews lasted approximately 45 minutes, and were tape recorded and transcribed. Final interviews with the middle managers took place between October and December, 1993. CHAPTER IV
THE CULTURAL KNOWLEDGE FRAMEWORK
Sackmann’s (1991) framework, which defines the concept of cultural groupings based on cultural knowledge, seems especially relevant to this research.
The cultural knowledge frame suggests that individuals within the organization will rely on different types of information or knowledge based, in part, upon their level within the organization’s hierarchy. These hierarchical levels are identified by
Sackmann (1991, 1992) as "functional domains." Sackmann’s (1991) concept of cultural knowledge derives from a utilization of the cognitive perspective within organizational and managerial literature.
Cognitions
The cognitive perspective focuses on the ideas, beliefs, concepts and mechanisms people use for organizing and structuring knowledge. The key question to be addressed is how people "make sense of their social and physical reality"
(Sackmann, 1991, p. 21). Thus, for Sackmann (1991),
64 65
[Cjulture refers to what humans learn, what they have in their mind, and not what they do or make. This accumulated knowledge that is held collectively provides standards for deciding what is, for deciding what to do, and for deciding how to do things (p. 21).
As a result, Sackmann notes that ”[T]he essence of culture can be conceptualized as the collective construction of social reality" (p. 33). It should be noted that individuals within the organization are not necessarily aware that they hold similar cognitions or beliefs; knowledge may be held collectively in the sense that several individuals share values or beliefs without expressing these beliefs or concepts to others within the organization.
The processes by which individuals perceive, interpret, and make sense of reality will affect their "actions, perceptions, judgments and thinking" (Sackmann,
1991, p. 33). In order to attach meaning to events, individuals "use cognitive structuring devices, or cognitions" (Sackmann, 1991, p. 34; emphasis in original).
Sackmann further defined "cognitions" as the "sets of categories that guide perception and thinking" (p. 34). She identified four different cognitive mechanisms and types of information that were relevant to individuals at different hierarchical levels in the organization: dictionary ("what is") knowledge; directory ("how to") knowledge, which illuminates causal-analytical relationships; recipe ("should/should not") knowledge, reflecting a causal-normative and valuative stance; and axiomatic
("why") knowledge (Sackmann, 1991). 66
According to Sackmann (1991), cognitions themselves
[A]re neutral sense-making, planning, and acting devices that are individually held. What makes them cultural is the aspect of collectivity and the kind of emotional attachment that goes with it.... Cultural cognitions are simultaneously held by several individuals....[T]hey are part of the collectivity....People who carry these cultural cognitions do not have to be aware of the fact that others hold the same cognitions. Thus, for an outsider, cultural cognitions are apparently shared. We refer to those who hold the same or similar cognitions...as a cultural grouping (pp. 38-40; emphasis in original).
Cultural groupings do not necessarily occupy the same or similar geographic areas within the organization. In addition, an individual may belong to more than one cultural grouping depending on the issue at hand the and cognitions held. Thus, organizational members may move between cultural groupings rather easily.
Dictionary Knowledge
Sackmann (1991) defines dictionary knowledge as knowledge of a descriptive nature, or "what is" knowledge. Within the category of dictionary knowledge,
Sackmann identified five themes, all of which relate to the organization: 1) goals and accomplishments, 2) strategy, 3) corporate structure, 4) the relationship between the organization and its employees, and 5) the physical environment.
Sackmann (1991) identified two different dimensions for dictionary knowledge themes. The first dimension reflects the corporation’s level of intention versus the level of realization for each theme. Intentions represent the idealized views that act as guides for the development and design of organizational plans. 67
When the plans are put into action, they represent concrete instances of the corporation’s attempts to achieve its intentions. The latter situation was referred to a "realization" by Sackmann (1991).
The second dimension identified by Sackmann (1991), which appears to be closely related to the concept of intentions and realizations, deals with the level of abstraction or concreteness expressed by organizational members. Generally,
Sackmann noted that those individuals near the top of the corporate hierarchy viewed the themes listed above in more abstract and idealized terms. The themes of goals, strategy, structure and so forth operate as general guidelines or
"parameters for actions" (Sackmann, 1991, p. 63). Respondents at lower levels in the corporate hierarchy expressed more concrete perspectives regarding the five themes of dictionary knowledge.
Sackmann (1991) also noted that middle managers expressed "an intermediate level of specificity" (p. 64) regarding the dictionary themes. Middle managers had specific knowledge of concrete actions regarding corporate goals and organizational structure, and were also aware of and expressed more abstract conceptions of these themes. Sackmann referred to this apparent overlap as an indicator of the
"brokerage function of middle management" (p. 64). It is apparently the job of middle managers to translate abstract concepts from top management into concrete actions for those whom middle managers supervise. 68
The relationship between the two dimensions listed above can be represented
as follows:
INTENTIONS < ______> REALIZATIONS
GENERAL < > SPECIFIC
UPPER LEVELS < ______> LOWER LEVELS
Figure 1. Dimensions in Dictionary Themes (adapted from Sackmann, 1991)
Thus, for example, Sackmann’s participants could be expected to respond very differently to questions regarding the corporation’s goals and accomplishments, depending upon where they were situated in the organizational hierarchy. With regard to corporate goals and accomplishments, Sackmann (1991) found that lower- level employees tended to respond in more concrete terms and gave examples of specific actions such as increased hiring or job security. Upper management, on the other hand, was more likely to cite increased sales volume or the objective of building a successful company in response to questions about corporate goals
(Sackmann, 1991).
Similarly, responses to questions about corporate strategy varied with respect to the participant’s hierarchical level. At lower levels, responses tended to cluster around specific areas such as production, marketing, or sales strategies; at upper levels, responses tended to focus on items such as "customer service," "profitable sales," or "controlled profitable growth" (Sackmann, 1991, p. 68). Sackmann 69 indicated that comparable findings occurred for corporate structure, the relationship of the organization and its employees, and the physical work environment.
Directory Knowledge
Directory knowledge can be viewed as process knowledge or as "how-to" knowledge (Sackmann, 1991). As with dictionary knowledge, there are several themes within the directory knowledge category. The four themes identified "refer to the way tasks are accomplished, the way people relate to each other, the way adaptation or change is accomplished, and the acquisition and perpetuation of knowledge" (Sackmann, 1991, pp. 90-91; emphasis in original).
The task accomplishment theme further differentiated between autonomy and teamwork (Sackmann, 1991). Autonomy was viewed as one’s ability and willingness to make an individual effort and produce some change or innovation within the company. Teamwork involved the coordination of efforts on the part of various individuals to take advantage of their various skills and abilities.
In contrast to the dictionary theme regarding the relationship of the organization and its employees, the directory theme of relationships among people referred to the interpersonal interactions between employees, as well as the relationships that employees had with their customers. Sackmann (1992) found that the relationships among people in her study tended to be "informal, direct, open, and respectful" (p. 151). Employees in Sackmann’s (1991) study tended to 70
characterize the company as a family, and expressed great loyalty toward the organization.
With regard to adaptation and change, Sackmann (1992) noted that the organization was both conservative and innovative. When significant financial resources were required, the company tended to act conservatively in making changes. On the other hand, the company also encouraged innovative behavior, especially when the innovations did not require financial commitments.
The theme of knowledge acquisition and perpetuation related to how organizational members gained new knowledge, and how existing knowledge was passed on to others within the company (Sackmann, 1991). Both of these processes tended to occur informally. New knowledge was generally obtained by hiring individuals who brought new information with them, or through reading journals or attending conferences. Knowledge was passed on throughout the organization via mentors or coaching relationships.
Although respondents in her study gave different answers regarding innovations or changes that had occurred within the company, Sackmann (1991) reported "that the underlying processes by which these different innovations were achieved are similar" (p. 91). Sackmann (1991) considered this similarity to be evidence of "cultural synergism, a term which expresses the notion that organizational members seem to act independently of each other, yet the underlying processes in their actions are very similar" (p. 92; emphasis in original). 71
Sackmann (1991) noted the presence of two "preconditions" that may help to explain the similarity of the directory knowledge among her respondents. The first precondition concerned the hiring and selection process for new employees.
The organization has identified particular characteristics that are sought in potential employees; the screening process is designed to identify candidates with these characteristics, and anyone hired who does not possess these traits generally does not last beyond the 30-day probationary period.
The second precondition involves organizational design. Sackmann (1991) found that the organization tended to operate on as decentralized a basis as possible in order to encourage employees to take responsibility and promote innovation. The organizational structure tended to be fairly flat, and individual divisions were permitted a significant amount of flexibility in determining how they would achieve their objectives.
Recipe Knowledge
Recipe knowledge reflects beliefs regarding what should or should not be done in a given situation (Sackmann, 1991, 1992). In addition, Sackmann (1992) defined recipe knowledge as "recipes of success or failure and recipes fo r success or failure" (p. 152; emphasis mine). In the case of the former, the recipes are developed from past experiences. Sackmann (1992) felt that this type of recipe 72
knowledge was associated with directory knowledge, especially since this type of
knowledge was present across the three divisions she included in her study.
As for the second type of recipe knowledge, Sackmann (1992) noted that
"recipes for success or failure suggested changes away from the present state" (p.
152). She further noted that this type of knowledge was more closely aligned with dictionary knowledge, since it was more peripheral to the grouping or division than was directory knowledge.
Although Sackmann (1991, 1992) reported that her study did not locate much information regarding recipe knowledge, she nevertheless identified four themes that emerged from the limited data available. The first theme was identified as "acting vs. talking about acting" (Sackmann, 1991, p. 118). Sackmann (1991) noted that this theme was present in all three divisions, and that its presence could be a reason why more evidence of recipe knowledge was not found; the employees in the organization tended to take action whenever they saw a problem, rather than talking about what should be done to alleviate the problem.
The second recipe theme was called "approach to change" (Sackmann, 1991).
This theme appeared to be stated most often by lower level employees, and reflected their belief that upper management tended to take a very cautious approach to change within the organization. The third theme, "time frame", appeared to be
related to that of "approach to change" (Sackmann, 1991). Recipe knowledge regarding time frame seemed to indicate that changes which will not require 73 significant financial allocations, or which do not involve obtaining information from a wide array of customers, can be implemented quickly. Changes requiring large financial expenditures, or that involve lengthy decision processes, are likely to be implemented only after a considerable length of time.
The fourth theme in recipe knowledge was called "problem areas"
(Sackmann, 1991). These were areas identified by respondents as being of current concern to the organization. Topics of concern included internal communications, the structure of upper management, and the physical work environment. Sackmann
(1991) noted that the latter topic was largely raised by those who occupied lower levels in the corporate hierarchy, such as shop floor personnel.
Axiomatic Knowledge
Sackmann (1992) reported that axiomatic knowledge, which focuses on the basic underlying assumptions of the organization, was apparent only at the highest level of managers in her study. Axiomatic knowledge, in Sackmann’s (1991) view,
"influenced the creation and perpetuation of [the organization]-its identity, aspirations, strategies, structure, and various operations" (p. 126). Thus, Sackmann
(1991) found that axiomatic knowledge functions at the organizational or institutional level.
While Sackmann (1991) did not identify themes, as such, in the axiomatic knowledge, she reported that this type of knowledge was evident in the views of the 74 top management group regarding the company’s business environment, profits, organizational structure, personnel perspectives, and the responsibilities of top corporate officers. Sackmann (1991) further noted that "Lower level employees acted on this knowledge, but they were not cognizant of it" (Sackmann, 1992, p.
153).
While Sackmann (1991) tended to downplay the importance of underlying or preconscious assumptions-which are the foundation of both Ott’s (1989) and
Schein’s (1985) ffameworks-she nevertheless emphasized unconscious beliefs and axiomatic knowledge as a starting point for establishing organizational purpose and selecting organizational members. Like Schein (1985), Sackmann (1991) also noted the role of the organization’s leader in establishing these basic assumptions, although she does not feel that the leader plays as important a role as Schein (1985) suggests.
Functional Domains
Sackmann (1992) notes that cultural groupings occur around "functional domains," which she identifies as follows:
[T]he totality of functions for which people considered themselves responsible. Functional domains are tied to people’s professional role perceptions and perceived responsibility in their professional roles rather than to such structural manifestations as departments or prescribed roles in an organization chart (pp. 147-148).
Three factors appear to influence the development of functional domains: 1) the hierarchical level occupied within the organization, 2) the identity of the division in 75 which the individual works, by which Sackmann (1991) meant the type of product, skills or technology related to that division, and 3) the nature of the work performed, especially with regard to lower levels in the organization (Sackmann,
1992).
Sackmann (1992) also found that similar functional domains in different divisions within the company tended to be more alike than were different functional domains within the same division. Thus, what some researchers may identify as
"subcultures" may be more strongly influenced by professional orientation and work roles than by the umbrella or parent organization itself.
The relationship between functional domains and cultural knowledge varied according to the type of knowledge; Sackmann (1992) found seven cultural groupings regarding dictionary knowledge, one cultural grouping related to directory knowledge, one cultural grouping (largely comprised of top managers) related to axiomatic knowledge, and no clear cultural groupings related to recipe knowledge.
Sackmann’s Framework and the Current Study
Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) framework of cultural knowledge within an organization was used to examine the upward influence (Chacko, 1990; Mowday,
1978; Schilit & Locke, 1982) strategies of middle managers. The cultural knowledge examined in this study was related to the information processing and exchange activities, both formal and informal, of the middle managers. This 76 knowledge was, in turn, used to examine the upward influence strategies and activities of four middle managers at Midwestern University.
In order to assess the findings of the current study using Sackmann’s cultural knowledge framework, it is necessary to identify the similarities and differences between the two studies.
Similarities Between Sackmann and the Current Study
Both studies utilized an interpretive approach, with the intention of understanding the perceptions of the organization’s members by examining their responses to semi-structured interviews. In each study, emergent themes were identified which were probed in subsequent interviews. The two studies also used informal observations and documentary analysis as a means of gathering additional data regarding the organization.
Differences Between the Two Studies
While each study relied primarily on interview data, Sackmann (1991) conducted one interview with each participant in her study (n=52). The interviews focused on the idea of "change" and innovation within the company. My study contained three interviews each with middle managers (n=4) and one interview with senior administrators (n=4); the focus in these interviews was on the information gathering activities and uses of information supplied by middle managers. 77
In addition, the hierarchical level of the participants differed in each study.
Sackmann’s (1991) participants included the following:
President (n= 1) Vice-Presidents (n=6) Various middle managers, including salespeople, accountants, and general managers (n=34) Secretarial and support staff (n=3) Shop floor workers, including welders and other assembly positions (n=8)
By contrast, my study focused solely on middle managers, with some input from
"decision makers" (identified as the president and vice-presidents of the university).
There were a total of four middle managers interviewed for this study, and four decision makers.
Sackmann (1991) also included information regarding the educational levels of her respondents. Twenty-nine of Sackmann’s participants had not completed a college degree, while 23 had finished college. Of those graduating from college,
11 had some professional training or certification, such as a CPA designation. By contrast, all participants in my study had completed at least a baccalaureate degree.
Among the middle managers, two had completed Masters’ degrees, one was in the process of earning an M.A., and the fourth was considering enrolling in one of several graduate programs. Of the decision makers in my study, three had earned terminal degrees.
Finally, there appeared to be some differences between the organizational tenure of the participants in each study. Sackmann’s respondents had an average length of tenure overall of 10 years; she did not distinguish between top managers, 78 middle managers, or shop floor employees. The middle managers in the current study had an average tenure at Midwestern of 10.25 years, with a range of between three and 19 years. Decision makers had an average tenure of six and a half years, with a range of two to 15 years. CHAPTER V
INSTITUTIONAL AND INDIVIDUAL PROFILES
Profiles of each of the participants in the study were developed in order to gain a better sense of each middle and senior manager and his or her connection to the institution and to other staff members or offices within the university. The method for developing the profiles was based on Seidman’s (1991) recommendations. Seidman (1991) suggests that profiles are useful as a means of describing and understanding research participants. Profiles tend to be fairly long compared to vignettes or other means of describing research participants. Whenever possible, the profile should be constructed from interview data in the interviewee’s own words as this gives the reader a more complete understanding of the context of the individual’s comments. In addition, the profile can be used as a means of analyzing segments or passages in the interview that the researcher has difficulty categorizing (Seidman, 1991). By including these segments in the profile, the researcher can often provide a more accurate picture of that participant for the reader.
The profiles for participants in this study were created using segments from the interview transcripts for each middle and senior manager. In some cases, these
79 80
segments had been coded according to Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) framework and
were identified as dictionary, directory, recipe or axiomatic knowledge; other
segments had not been coded as belonging to any specific category, yet still seemed
to say something unique about the individual participant.
Each middle manager received a profile along with a request for feedback and comments. For the most part, the middle managers responded positively to their profiles, although most of them had questions regarding how this material would be used. In addition, one middle manager, Scott, expressed his concerns over the way his networking activities were portrayed in the profile; he felt that the profile made him sound "Machiavellian". The final interview with Scott began with a discussion of these concerns, and enabled me to refine and clarify some of Scott’s prior responses. Thus, the profile served as a means for both furthering my understanding of the participants and their viewpoints, and also functioned as a form of "member check" (Lincoln & Guba, 1975).
Due to the nature of this study, it was also necessary to develop a profile of the institution itself. Since the work activities, attitudes, and cultural knowledge of the participants are shaped, to a large degree, by the environment within which they operate, it should be helpful for the reader to gain a greater understanding of Multi-
Purpose Midwestern University. The profile for the institution was developed based on observations of the campus and examination of the printed and promotional materials provided by the university. The latter included the institution’s self-study 81 report, campus newspaper, bulletin, alumni magazines, samples of fund-raising letters, and publications used by the admissions office.
The individual profiles should also prove useful to the reader. Each profile provides an overview of the middle manager’s or senior administrator’s relationship to the institution, as well as a general overview of that person’s perspective on several topics related to the study. The names of all participants, as well as that of the institution itself, have been replaced with pseudonyms.
Multi-Purpose Midwestern University: An Institutional Profile
In August, a brightly painted sign at the northwest corner of the campus welcomes students and parents to the "Midwestern Family." The grounds are immaculate, and the lawns, trees and flowers appear the same as in the university’s viewbook. Although the campus is located in a large Midwestern city, the buildings and landscaping seem more in keeping with a traditional small-college town.
The surrounding community also welcomes students and their families by placing banners-in Midwestern’s school colors-on all of the lampposts on the main street in front of the campus. Throughout the year, the community will help advertise events on Midwestern’s campus by changing the banners. Posters for various town/gown events also appear in the local shops. The atmosphere thus generated is that of a small community within a metropolitan area. This is a point that the university makes often in its promotional materials; Midwestern combines 82 the security and traditional programs of a small college with the cultural and career opportunities of a big city.
Multi-Purpose Midwestern University, also known as "Midwestern," is a church-affiliated institution. The university has been in operation for over 100 years, and notes this fact prominently in most of its publications. The image of
Midwestern that is presented in the viewbook, course bulletin, and other materials, is that of a small, comprehensive institution with a lively and traditional undergraduate program. Both the undergraduate viewbook, distributed by the admissions office, and several other marketing pieces emphasize the undergraduate experience. In 1993, however, the traditional undergraduate enrollment was just over half that of the total institutional enrollment. Several graduate and professional programs, as well as a very active off-campus program, comprise almost half the total student population.
Most of the traditional undergraduate students, and some of the graduate students as well, live on campus in university residence halls. Recent enrollment increases have begun to put a strain on Midwestern’s ability to house all of its undergraduates on campus. If traditional undergraduate enrollment continues at the same level, or increases, the university will not be able to accommodate all requests for residence hall rooms. Several of the residence halls have undergone extensive renovation in the past few years to both upgrade facilities and also to provide housing for students of either gender. Until about 1991, one residence hall was only 83 intended to house male students, while several others were only designed for female students. Changes in bathroom fixtures, security, and building decor have since taken place.
Midwestern’s church affiliation has also affected residence hall operations.
Until recently, all of the halls housed either male or female students. While many other institutions made their residence halls co-ed in the 1970’s, Midwestern only took this step in the last three years, and then only for upperclass students.
As for the rest of the campus, many of the administration and classroom buildings were built during the 1960’s and clearly demonstrate the architectural style of that era: plain brick buildings with walls of chrome and glass, sealed windows, and concrete steps. Every building on campus, with the exception of the library, either has several steps leading to the door, or requires that one climb or descend several steps once inside. Recent campus renovations have included wheelchair ramps and outside elevator entrances to accommodate the disabled.
A few of the buildings, including some residence halls, are clearly older and reflect a more traditional architectural style. Several are somewhat Gothic in appearance, with ornate arches and fancy masonry work. These are the buildings that are featured most often in viewbook publications or campus pictures.
The interiors of many buildings, including furniture and other fixtures, have not been updated in quite some time. The furniture in the main lounge in the campus center, which is used for many gatherings and campus functions, was 84 recently replaced; the old furniture had been there since the center was built in the
1960s. Many of the classrooms and laboratories likewise appear quite dated, although the music and nursing programs have recently received new equipment and facilities. In contrast to the colorful and carefully maintained grounds, the interiors of most of the classroom buildings almost appear to belong to a different institution.
The undergraduate curriculum has recently been revised to include a 12- course core encompassing cultural diversity, critical thinking, and communication skills. Students are also required to take courses in the fine and performing arts, health and physical education, and philosophy. The university’s church affiliation is also demonstrated by its requirement that all students take course work in
"religious and ethical systems, particularly those basic to the Judaeo-Christian tradition," as outlined in Midwestern’s college bulletin.
Midwestern boasts a small student/faculty ratio. Students and faculty both tend to be white, although more students and faculty of color have arrived in recent years. Many faculty members have been with Midwestern for a long time, some for their entire academic career. Many stories are told of faculty members who would go to a student’s room to inquire why the student had not been attending class, or who invited students to their homes for dinner and made them feel "like family."
The "family" metaphor is one that is used often by the university, both internally and externally. The alumni magazine often refers to the "Midwestern 85
Family," and family and community themes echo throughout other publications and letters. Similarly, staff and faculty refer to the "Midwestern Family" when talking about the institution. Not everyone agrees, however, that the "family" metaphor is appropriate. In recent years, the "family" motif has been emphasized in admissions presentations and in other contexts, but the origin of the family theme-and its relevance to the university’s current operations-is rarely examined. As one middle manager in the study noted, "When this was really a family institution, we weren’t running around talking about the Midwestern family."
Individual Profiles: Middle Managers
Profile for Jav
Jay has been an academic administrator in higher education for 28 years, almost 20 of which have been spent at Midwestern. For most of his career, Jay has worked in positions that were related to registration, records, and advising. Within the last two years, however, he has made a lateral move within Midwestern and is now focusing on classroom assessment issues and institutional research for the university.
The key problem facing Jay, from his perspective, is that the faculty do not seem to feel any ownership or recognition for the role that they should play in assessment. There appears to be a general lack of interest or involvement on the 86 faculty’s part regarding these matters. Thus, many of Jay’s comments related to his ideas for gaining greater faculty involvement in the assessment process.
Jay’s suggestions ranged from the concrete and symbolic to the theoretical.
On the concrete dimension, Jay stated that something as simple as moving the office to a more visible location in one of the academic buildings in the center of campus would help the office gain credibility as an academic-and thus, faculty-related- enterprise. Likewise, changing the current reporting relationship within the institution, and making the department report directly to the chief academic officer, would be a means of linking the department with the academic side in a symbolic fashion.
On the theoretical side, Jay has located literature relating to assessment and made sure that every faculty member received a copy of a recent text on the topic.
He also conducted a workshop on assessment at the annual Faculty Retreat, and hoped to invite a prominent researcher on the topic to the campus for a more extensive seminar later in the school year. Jay also looks to the experiences of other colleges that have visible and active assessment programs for ideas on how to improve the status and role of assessment at his institution. These external sources are a legitimating device for encouraging the faculty to accept a greater role in the assessment process at Midwestern.
By the same token, however, Jay notes that the assessment program does not have global significance for the institution. The decisions and reports written by 87
Jay’s office do not appear to carry much weight elsewhere in the university. In fact, Jay questions whether many people outside of his immediate area have even read the reports or looked through the data provided by Jay and his staff.
Part of the reason for the seeming neglect of Jay’s reports may be that the research agenda for the department is established by Jay and his staff. They decide what sounds interesting, and then check with the Dean to whom they report for his feedback. The Dean usually encourages Jay and his staff to proceed with the research or report in question. Relatively few, if any, of the reports generated by
Jay’s office have been the result of requests for information by faculty members or other administrators.
This is not to suggest that Jay is out of touch with the needs or interests of other staff or faculty at Midwestern, however. In fact, Jay is extremely well connected in the University’s formal and informal networks. He currently chairs five faculty search committees, is a member of the academic affairs committee of the undergraduate faculty, sits on the Provost’s Council, and is also helping to advise students in the external degree program.
In addition, Jay noted that he is regularly contacted by faculty and other administrators who use him as a "sounding wall" or as "someone that will listen and provide feedback" in a non-adversarial manner. During the first interview, Jay stated that this was one of the things he enjoyed most about being a university administrator. 88
At the same time, however, Jay noted that the existence of an adversarial relationship between faculty and administrators was one of the things that he most disliked about higher education administration. It could be that this adversarial perspective interferes with some of Jay’s plans to increase the focus on assessment issues, also. Jay felt that there is a sense of "nervousness" between faculty and administrators, with each side asking itself what the other is doing. In Jay’s view, this is a continuing problem for higher education in general, especially since greater emphasis is being placed on accountability and institutional efficiency.
In the long run, Jay sees the social and political climate forcing a greater level of cooperation and trust between faculty and administration:
I think that as funds become more limited, as financial aid becomes more limited, as people, as parents, as legislators demand more and more accountability for what’s happening, it’s going to necessitate the employees of the university, of the institution, working more as a team rather than a "we" and "they."
For the time being, however, Jay must find a way to deal with this apparently adversarial relationship so as to be able to move the institution forward on classroom assessment issues.
Profile for Scott
Scott came to Multi-Purpose Midwestern University in 1979 as Director of
Residence Life and has remained in the residence life and student services area throughout that time period. Like Joyce, another middle manager in the study, 89 serendipity played a role in Scott’s decision to enter higher education administration.
Scott had originally attended college to gain teaching credentials. When he was close to graduating, however, the faculty in his department called a general meeting of the education students and informed them that the job prospects for various fields were rather bleak. Scott realized that his certification would not be in one of the areas with any reasonable demand, and opted to enter the service after graduation.
When he left the service, he considered his options again and realized that one of the things he had truly enjoyed during his college years was his position as a residence hall advisor. As a result, Scott enrolled in a Master’s program in
Student Personnel Administration. He has been in this field ever since, and for the most part enjoys his work a great deal.
During the first interview, Scott’s comments were very matter-of-fact responses to inquiries. He referred once or twice to strategies that he used in order to get things done, such as using an "end run" to get around other staff members who were not cooperating with his requests for assistance. Scott also alluded to the fact that it occasionally takes the comments or complaints of an outsider, such as a parent, to get other administrators to notice the problems that Scott has long since identified.
Although Scott mentioned several times during the first interview that he had
"responsibility but no power," it was clear during the second interview that, with 90 regard to certain issues at least, Scott was able to influence the outcome of the decision. In part, this may be due to his understanding of the roles and underlying values of other divisions and constituencies on the campus.
During the second interview, Scott also displayed an extensive awareness of the underlying assumptions or bedrock foundations that guide the actions of various divisions and constituencies within the institution. Scott stated that decisions are usually made with "the good of the university" in mind. In response to my request to elaborate on what he meant by "the good of the university," Scott replied:
Well, what hat are you wearing? If you’re wearing a [clerical] collar, it’s not the same as if you’re wearing an accountant’s visor. It’s not the same....But then again, when you make accounting decisions, you’re talking about the good of the institution, then you start talking about investments and interest rates and all that kind of stuff. You can’t make those kinds of decisions with a lot of ties to theological things.... whereas of course, when a minister comes in here, he doesn’t care anything about the business end of the deal....So, when you talk about the good of the university, it depends on what discussion you’re sitting in on.
While Scott feels that Student Life is an important part of the university, he nevertheless realizes that there are many other aspects of importance to the institution, and that stakeholders and administrators within those divisions may view the same situation or problem very differently than he does.
This is not to say that Scott cannot or does not fight for what he feels is important for his area. Quite the contrary. Of all the middle managers interviewed for this study, Scott employs by far the greatest variety of strategies and techniques for achieving his goals if he feels that they are important to the institution. He also 91 exhibited the greatest awareness of his use of strategy to accomplish needed goals and objectives.
Scott’s strategies include enlisting external agents or sources to buttress his suggestions or recommendations; these external sources include parents, faculty members, university committees, and, occasionally, the literature on student development issues. Scott also seems keenly aware of the role that his area plays in the overall health and well-being of the institution.
However, as mentioned previously, Scott is also very conscious of the roles and importance of other divisions and departments on campus. As a result, he is able to, more or less, tailor his approach or strategy to ’hit the right buttons’ with other campus decision-making groups. On several occasions, Scott referred to himself as a "salesman", as in the following comments regarding his involvement in the decision to make one of the larger residence halls into a co-ed facility (which would entail major renovation costs):
I sold it from two different directions. You know, ’cause as I said, there were two facets of this decision. We could’ve made the greatest programmatic decision in the world, but if I couldn’t have convinced the resource management that this was worth the money, we wouldn’t have done it [T]he flexibility thing is more important to resource management than anything.
More than any other middle manager in the study, Scott cultivates useful resource people within the institution. He deliberately involves faculty members in residence life programs so they will have an understanding of what Scott and his staff do for and with students. Scott also makes sure that he contacts faculty 92 members who sit on committees that deal with Student Life or residence hall decisions; he hopes that doing this will help faculty members when they need to make decisions about funding or policies.
Pragmatism seems to guide much of Scott’s philosophy toward working in higher education administration. Scott was the only middle manager in the study not to mention an adversarial environment on campus. In part, this may be due to his extensive networking and his strategies to achieve the ends necessary for his division. In part, however, this may also be due to his general outlook on working in higher education:
I don’t think there is an adversarial relationship. Not at all....If there one on campus, it might be between other divisions, but I don’t have an adversarial relationship with anybody...I don’t think there are adversarial relationships here. Maybe that, sometimes, that can be almost more frustrating, because when things don’t get done you wonder why. "If you’re not my enemy, why aren’t you my friend all the time?" And then that’s because there are other priorities, and sometimes other things have to get done first. But you just have to realize that sometimes the ball bounces your way and sometimes it doesn’t.. .You just have to work to get it bouncing your way as much as you can.
Profile for Joyce
In August of 1993, Joyce observed her eleventh anniversary of working in higher education administration. For almost all of those years, Joyce has worked in the field of college admissions. Like Scott, Joyce worked in the student services field while attending college; Joyce was the weekend receptionist and a member of the student ambassador organization for the admissions office of her university. 93
She, too, majored in education, and when she applied for jobs after graduation, she applied for one job in higher education and several teaching positions. As she put it, " [I]t was kind of the theory of whatever came first, whatever job was offered first, and the [higher education] job came before a teaching offer."
Multi-Purpose Midwestern University is the third institution Joyce has worked for since graduating from college, and she is currently an assistant director in the admissions office. This is a role and a level within the organization with which Joyce is very comfortable. It enables her, as she said during the first interview, to "do a whole lot of stuff without the headaches." By this, Joyce meant
You provide support for a person who’s ultimately in charge, and...being at that second-tier level, you have the freedom to make choices and decisions, but you don’t have a lot of the downward pressure put on by other people. The downside is, you have to please both sides....you’re not completely free to make all decisions ’cause there is somebody that wants to have something a certain way, but then...you have to be the translator of those ideas to the people who actually have to implement them.
For a variety of reasons, being situated in middle management, rather than in a major decision-making role, is preferable for Joyce. She noted that she is not a risk-taker, and expressed the view that people who occupy higher-level positions within the university do so without benefit of a "safety net." As a result,
I think as an upper-level administrator, it’s a real challenge because you kind of are working in isolation, and you don’t have a lot of support systems when you get up there towards the top to be either feeding you ideas or validating your ideas. You kind of are working in a little vacuum up there. And that...doesn’t appeal to me. 94
In contrast to some of the other middle managers in the study, Joyce does not seem to have a need to lobby for or pursue specific objectives in order to resolve problems or issues related to her office. She sees her position largely as being responsible for the data collected and disseminated by her office. She handles requests for information from people within or outside of her office, and usually provides them with the requested information via a report, often following a standardized format.
The type of information that she includes in the report depends, to some extent, on "the astuteness of the person asking for the information." Joyce noted that some people are very astute about the type of information they need, while others may need to be "educated" in order to obtain the information appropriate to their needs. In those circumstances, especially, the information that Joyce chooses to include is based on her experience.
A lot of it is getting information that would make sense to them, then be able to decipher what they need to know When you break it down like that, there really isn’t a science to that. In certain areas I’ll be able to provide as much information as needed, and then people can draw their own conclusions.
While Joyce herself depends most upon data that is quantitative or
"crunchable," she acknowledged that there are two other sources of information that she accesses regularly. Both of these sources involve qualitative or subjective data.
The first is campus visit evaluations submitted by prospective students, and the 95 second source includes comments from the admission counselors based on interviews and interactions with students and parents.
Although Joyce will usually turn first to information found in the computer when she is requested to produce a report, there are times when other data sources seem more compelling. It "depends on the situation," according to Joyce. There have even been occasions when subjective data or "gut feelings" outweighed the objective facts available. This can be a result of the particular incident or situation;
Joyce related one instance where she and her boss decided to suppress certain information because it ran counter to a position already publicly taken by the university. On the whole, however, Joyce prefers to provide the information and let those who request the data make their own decisions.
I think it’s important to have the data so that people know the setting and the situation and the background in which they’re making the decision. Whether they decide to go with what the data supports or not is their choice, but at least they’re making decisions based on information. So many times...the data speak very loudly in terms of the decision that we will make.
Profile for Carrie
During college, Carrie worked at other institutions in clerical or support staff positions. After graduation, she obtained a position as director of development at a YWCA. There, she coordinated all aspects of the fund-raising effort for the organization. Carrie said that, once she became involved in development, she knew that she wanted to return to a higher education environment in this field. 96
At the urging of a friend and mentor, she applied for the Annual Fund position at Midwestern when it became available, and was made the Director of the
Annual Fund in January, 1990. According to Carrie, the position at Midwestern was an excellent opportunity for someone with only three years’ experience in fund raising.
Once at Midwestern, Carrie seemed to develop an definite affection for the institution itself. There are many aspects of Multi-Purpose Midwestern University that are important to Carrie:
Now that I look back I know that, if I ever leave Midwestern I know my next position I would look for some similar aspects...like small liberal-arts, private, perhaps even church-related. Because of the environment that I think it tends to offer... I’ve been through a lot of changes in my own life since I’ve been here and have felt the support and the caring and the loving from everybody that has been in my division, in the university, that sort of thing. It tends to be...a very warm, caring environment. I guess that sums it up.
As the youngest middle manager in the study, both in terms of chronological and career age, Carrie expressed some perspectives that differed from those of the other middle managers. For example, Carrie seemed much more hesitant to promote her projects or ideas, although this is not how she defined her actions. In comparing herself to another middle manager in her division, Carrie noted the following: 97
I suppose there’s a little bit of difference between [the other middle manager] and I in that I’m still relatively new, and young in the field in terms of my years of experience, and I’m a lot more flexible to ideas and input. I’ll go in with some thoughts, hoping to be able to generate the ideas and come up with the best plan possible, whereas [the other manager] has so many years experience and has talked to so many...[division] directors, and she knows what needs to be done. She knows it.
What Carrie called "flexibility" was revealed in other segments of the interview as a reluctance to be blamed or criticized for mistakes. At the beginning of this study, Carrie did not appear to view herself as someone who had the authority to make any decision, no matter how minor, without first obtaining the approval of a fairly large number of senior administrators. Matters that similarly- situated middle managers in the study would consider routine were viewed by Carrie as being major stumbling blocks. As the study progressed, however, Carrie seemed to change both her outlook and her actions with regard to her relationship to her boss and to other middle managers.
In comparison to Joyce, who generally consulted only her immediate superior before releasing information or reports, Carrie felt the need to approach and receive permission from several administrators. One example was a letter that Carrie wanted to send out regarding last-minute contributions to the Annual Fund. With the end of the fiscal year rapidly approaching, Carrie planned to send out a final appeal letter to donors. She ultimately did not send the letter because she could not obtain permission from her boss in time. In explaining her approach to such situations, Carrie noted the following: 98
There are other things that we’ll do that we don’t need his approval, but when I send something out, no matter what it is, if I put it in the mail, I make sure that the President knows what’s in it, I make sure the Vice-President knows what’s in it, the Communications Services has had an opportunity to proof it for grammatical errors... .1 s’pose it’s a CYA thing, I mean, I don’t want something to go out and then have him to freak out and say why in the heck...who sent that out? So part of it’s feeling like I should make sure he knows about it, the other part is, I’m not going to get flamed for something that I could have prevented.
Considering the volume of letters generated by Carrie’s office, the involvement of so many other people in each mailing would seem to hamper her ability to get her job done. Nevertheless, it became apparent that this strategy was extremely important to Carrie at the time:
I realize that I’m the type of person that insists upon having all twelve people that think they need to look at it, look at die letter. There’s no sense of pride in it for me....I don’t know if it’s ego or what, but I’m perfectly happy with everybody having input into it....I guess what I started out saying was, I see the value of it, in two different ways.... One, if they want to see it, that’s perfectly fine with me and two, nobody can come back to me and say I didn’t do it right. If it doesn’t work, if it goes out in the mail and it doesn’t work, it wasn’t completely my idea alone.
Paradoxically, Carrie also mentioned in numerous occasions during the interviews that she perceived herself and other middle managers in her division to be neglected or ignored, especially by her previous boss.
I basically wasn’t listened to and wasn’t listened to....
...it was all something that I had learned over the years, but never had an opportunity to implement...
But I guess what I’m saying is that it was a classic example of nobody listening to the guy in the middle, who knows what’s going on... 99
I was giving the answer, I was waving the red flag, but nobody wanted to hear me, and it wasn’t until that individual [her previous boss] left and another one came aboard and started asking questions, from maybe a different perspective, you know, I can’t really explain why, but he was willing to listen, and he said to me..."You guys knew what was going on. Nobody was listening to you." But our hands were really tied.
By the end of the study, however, Carrie’s comments indicated a dramatic shift in her outlook and in her relationship to senior administrators. She said that she had become more assertive and self-confident. In addition, while she still seeks final approval from her boss on most projects, she no longer merely waits for him to fit her into his schedule. Rather, she will approach her boss with the two or three most important matters; she said that she has literally stopped him in the hall, if necessary, and does not let him leave until she has resolved any questions or problems she has with that particular project.
Individual Profiles: Senior Administrators
Profile for Frank
When Frank arrived at Multi-Purpose Midwestern University in 1990 his position was Associate Provost for Admission and Financial Aid. In the summer of
1993, he was also placed in charge of the institution’s strategic planning process.
During the course of this study, the position of Vice-President for Enrollment
Management was created, and Frank was named to that office. 100
By virtue of his position in the institutional hierarchy, Frank sits on the
President’s Cabinet, the Executive Cabinet, and the Budget and Long-Range
Planning Committee. Frank thus has a unique perspective on the overall decision making process of the university.
In addition, Frank holds a doctorate in educational research, which may help to explain his preference for quantitatively-oriented data in decision-making contexts.
Like Joyce, his second in command, Frank appears to rely heavily on hard facts and figures. He also made many comments that reflected an emphasis on efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability for his office and for the institution. An example of this theme occurred when Frank discussed the mission of the Admissions Office:
[0]ur goal is to bring in a sufficiently qualified class to be successful at Multi-Purpose Midwestern University, and meet the revenue requirements of the university, and match the resources of the university. What I mean by the last is, we can’t bring in a Conservatory class of ten and 600 [in the] Arts and Sciences, because that’s not matching our educational resources.
Frank stresses accountability, as well as the ability to measure and evaluate the actions of his office. This notion appears to permeate the activities of the Office of Admission, and again depends on quantitative measures. As Frank noted:
[W]hat we ultimately end up doing is trying to build in some measure of whatever we’re doing. The number of people at the Open House, the percentage of those who came to the Open House who actually applied, the number of people who-the percentage of people who received a brochure and returned a reply card. So we, with almost everything we do, we also are looking for a way we can-some sort of feedback from that. 101
The admissions field is highly cognizant of application and acceptance ratios, as well as the yield in admitted and enrolled students. By the same token, Frank also made statements that appeared to reflect an institutional interest in the ratios and numbers coming out of the admissions office:
[W]e are very much driven by ratios here. Conversion, yield, retention. And that’s kind of the way everybody’s thinking right now....At the end of the year, what we’re looking for is a summation of data, and that then is primarily ratios and numbers.
The institutional interest in numbers and quantitative data was also mentioned by other senior administrators. In part, this appears to be a reaction to the decision-making style of the university embodied by the previous President. During his "reign", as one administrator called it, decisions were made on the spur-of-the- moment and were based, according to Frank, on "educated guesses." The decision making process "is becoming more data-driven" now, in Frank’s view. However, the perception that decisions and actions are taken in a crisis mentality still pervades the viewpoints of many people on campus; Frank himself is aware of this reputation even though he came to Midwestern several years after the previous President had departed.
Frank’s goal for both the offices he oversees and the institution as a whole is to increase efficiency. One of the benefits of the strategic planning process, in his view, is that Midwestern will become "a much more efficient university, a much more focused university" and will make "more effective use of our resources." By helping the university and individual departments within the institution to plan for 102 the future, the job of the admissions office will be that much easier. As Frank noted,
It’s clear that we had to start focusing in the last year or so, because it’s not just a body count. It’s a different type of student that we’re looking for. The better we can articulate what the biology department is all about, what its strengths are, the more effective job we’re [Admissions] going to do.
Profile for Richard
Fifteen years after coming to Multi-Purpose Midwestern University, Richard is now the Dean for Learning and Assessment. A faculty member until 1986,
Richard decided to move into the administration because he was tired of teaching and felt he needed new challenges. His willingness to take risks was illustrated by his explanation for this career change:
To move into an administrative position....I had to give up tenure. Now I could have come to the position for two years, and then, after that, gone back. But I didn’t want to. Some people around here could have done that, but I couldn’t...In both cases they went back to the classroom, they didn’t give up anything....I thought...you’re kind of setting yourself up for failure if you do that. Because there’s always this little safety net, so I didn’t want to do that.
Richard is also a member of the Cabinet and of the Long-Range Planning
Committee. Given the length of time he has been at the University, and his place within the hierarchy, Richard has a great deal of insight into both the history of decisions at the institution and the current decision-making process. Richard has no desire to function as the institution’s memory, however, as he sees a reliance on 103 history as a rationale for doing things as they have always been done. As an example, Richard cited how some faculty resist changing the core curriculum or specific courses within their department. He briefly related a story about faculty in one department who did not want to revise their major because it had been revised in 1968; they felt that that revision was sufficient, even though 25 years had passed since that time.
Like Frank, Richard noted that institutional decisions were generally made by the President alone during the previous President’s administration. With the current administration, however, there appears to be much greater involvement at all levels of the university.
With this President, things are a lot different. There’s concern about planning, and looking long-range, and finance, and there are almost-to a fault, I think-too many voices involved. But, better to hear it all first, and then decide whether you’re going to ignore some of it.
Richard’s responsibilities include overseeing the operations of the
University’s evening and off-campus learning centers, as well as the Assessment
Center. Richard indicated that he involved his middle managers in decisions regarding their programs and budgets by seeking their views on program changes, policies, and other topics. Like Jay, who directs the Assessment Center, Richard also uses external forces to help push through changes that he believes are necessary. One instance of this occurred when the President indicated his concern over the use of part-time instructors at the off-campus locations: 104
Well, I’ve been asking for more full-time people for four or five years, and it’s always been no. [The Provost] would say, "No, we’re going to cut those [positions]. Well, this time, with the President saying that, it’s great. I went to the Center directors, I said, "Look, you want full time people, this is what you do. Show me where the money’s coming from." And so they took adjunct and part-time money and said "This is a full position." [Richard asked them] "And can you fill it?" "Sure." I went back to the Budget Committee with that scenario, wasn’t even questioned.
Richard’s prime concern with his middle managers appears to be avoiding surprises. He places great emphasis on communication, and wants to be apprised of any situations that might need his attention, or that might come to the attention of other constituencies within the university.
You know, there are certain times when you don’t need all the steps in the chain. As long as I know about it, that’s all. Just so I can respond to other constituents who say "Well, hey, why is this happening?"
Richard, in turn, tries to avoid having his middle managers be surprised by policy changes or other institutional decisions, although he is concerned that he may not be able to keep everyone as well-informed as he would like. The desire to stay informed and avoid surprises was emphasized throughout Richard’s interview.
Profile for George
As Dean of Student Services, George has been Scott’s supervisor for the past six years. George, like Frank and Richard, is a member of the President’s Cabinet, the Dean’s Council, the Provost’s Council, and the Budget and Long-Range 105
Planning Committee. He has also volunteered to be on several other University committees
More than the other senior managers, George appears to rely heavily on written reports from the middle managers in his area when dealing with the Board of Trustees or other senior administrators. George’s middle managers are expected to complete a detailed four-part monthly report outlining their activities, accomplishments and student contacts within the past month, as well as any concerns or possible issues they see "on the horizon." What is somewhat unique about this reporting process is that George insists on compiling all the data by hand, and then writes out his report in longhand.
It’s particularly not fun for me because I have to compile all the letters, and it’s very time-consuming, but nevertheless I’ve decided that even though a lot of what I do is clerical on it, it forces me to go through everybody’s report every month and keeps me abreast of what’s going on and raises some questions sometimes....I also send copies of the report to the Provost so that he’s got it as well.
Due to the length of time that George has been requiring these reports from his middle managers, he has found that his staff has begun to conform to his expectations of what should be included and how it should be worded:
[T]he nice part is now they’ve been here long enough that they’re submitting it to me in the form that I usually write is, so there are some that I almost have no editing to do at all, and one of the things that I do which wastes time, but again forces me to do it...is that I copy over the reports. I actually handwrite the report, and so I’ve got all these typed reports that are generally coming to me, and again, rather than cutting and pasting them, or retyping diem, I actually hand write it to force me to read it word-by-word. 106
In part, George believes that this activity helps to make up for not holding regular staff meetings. He feels that he interacts often enough with his staff, and obtains enough information from these reports, that regularly-scheduled staff meetings are unnecessary. He also noted that the reports are useful for retrieving information, especially when he needs to prepare his report for the Board of Trustees.
As an afterthought, George revealed that the true value of doing his reports in this manner was that it enabled him to make sense of what his middle managers were saying. The usefulness of the information they provide him
generally comes out of the editing process. In other words, I can look at, look through a list of accomplishments and say "Wait a minute, you know, going to a staff lunch is not really an accomplishment"... .There’s really no way to vouch for the accuracy of it, I mean, it’s conceivable that somebody made up all these meetings, but again, knowing the staff as well as I do, and having familiarity with what they do...I don’t think there’s a whole lot of fluff.
One of the more striking aspects of George’s interview was his grasp of and concern regarding issues facing higher education as a whole. He tends to speak and think in what could be called "big picture" terms. Examples of some of these concerns included the overall cost trends in private higher education, and the impact that rising tuition has on financial aid resources. He is also concerned that, with the current economic outlook and the near-capacity utilization of the university’s resources, there will not be sufficient room for the institution to grow financially.
Although his area of responsibility is limited largely to the residence halls, campus center, and other non-academic buildings, he is nevertheless worried about the lack 107 of classroom space on campus. While other senior managers interviewed expressed some similar concerns, they did not seem unusual because of the area of responsibility for these administrators.
Profile for Ernest
Ernest had been with Midwestern for almost four years at the time he was interviewed for this study. After two decades in marketing and communications in the private sector, he came to Midwestern to help with public relations for the university’s capital campaign.
Ernest worked closely with Midwestern’s president to help develop a marketing strategy for the university, and three years after his arrival he was appointed Vice-President for University Development. It is not a position that he actively sought. In fact, he had not planned to remain at Midwestern after the first phase of the capital campaign was completed. However, after spending three years on campus he decided that he would be willing to stay for a few more years. Ernest is currently a member of the President’s Cabinet and the Long-Range Planning
Committee, and he serves as a special liaison for the president with a variety of groups within and outside the institution.
Ernest’s background in both the marketing area and the private sector is evident in his perspective on management in higher education. He sees himself as being primarily involved with issues management; Ernest said that he is very 108 conscious of his role as the institution’s "point man," and realizes the importance of presenting the university in the best possible light in any given circumstance.
One of the challenges of his position, Ernest said, is that "you’re constantly involved in issues and remembering that you have to interpret or articulate the university’s official position on these things." By "these things," Ernest meant anything from dealing with graffiti on university buildings to developing the university’s image for the fund-raising campaign.
Ernest expressed a deep respect for the academic side of the institution. He is acutely aware that his division is a support unit for the rest of the university.
[Midwestern] is a teaching institution, and that’s why we exist. And everything that we do [in his division] has to be directed towards supporting that....I’m very sensitive that my organization is a support organization. And that you fully understand what the priorities of the academic side of the house are, and you work towards helping them achieve their goals. You’ve got to do that. And anytime you become bigger than that, you don’t belong here. And I tell people that. You’ve got to do that, you’ve got to know what’s going on out there.
The primary concern for Ernest, in both his own actions and in terms of the institutional decisions of which he is a part, is whether the actions or decisions benefit the university:
How did it make it...a better place? A better university? Is what we’re doing, is that for the overall good of the university? If you’re not doing that, you’d better back off and take an look and say "What am I missing here?" You’ve got to be very careful that you don’t lose that perspective and that focus. 109
Thus, the fund-raising and public relations efforts that Ernest oversees are aimed at improving the university’s abilities to serve its students and the larger community as a whole.
Part of Ernest’s effort over the past two years has been directed at creating and marketing a clearer image of Multi-Purpose Midwestern University. Ernest was concerned that the institution was not presenting itself well, and that the publications and other sources of information about the university did not adequately tell the public about Midwestern. He related his efforts and rationale in this area:
When I came here, with my background, I felt that we were not doing a good job communicating and telling about Multi-Purpose Midwestern University....I felt we needed to communicate with the alumni and friends, so we changed [the look of the alumni magazine]....But you can see messages, and you ought to look through these [publications] and see the strategy on it....[These publications] reflect my position that I want the Midwestern University story told....They’re all positioning pieces, all of them are....[T]hose pieces are directed towards first, alumni, going to all the friends, foundations, corporate leadership, anyplace I can raise money. There’s a subtle marketing-I mean, you look at that, you’re going to think "Whew, this is someplace different."
Ernest stated that he regularly involved middle managers in helping him with decisions, and that he is in constant contact with his staff members. If a decision needs to be made, he will go to various middle managers and ask for their views on the issue at hand. Part of the reason for this appears to be his relative lack of experience at Multi-Purpose Midwestern University. As he noted,
I haven’t been here long enough to know all the, I mean, you have to think about the church here, you have to think about the college here, you have to think about the business itself here. They’ve [the middle 110
managers] got some insight on those things, and a lot of those things I don’t know. And if you sit in this chair and think you know everything, you’re on your way out.
In order to use his staff effectively, Ernest’s management style includes
"management by walking around," whereby he goes to various offices and speaks with his staff members on a regular-almost daily-basis. Ernest made the following comments about his management philosophy:
I’m a little different manager, probably, than some. I am in daily contact with these people all the time. I’d be surprised if Carrie didn’t tell you that. They’re in and out of here all the time. I mean, I’m in constant contact with all my directors. It’s like this morning....I had seen two directors on the way in....I just worked my way up through all of them, and throughout the day, every day, I will see them all. We meet once a month on a regularly-scheduled basis, but...all day long I’m with them. I believe in open communications, I think you’ve got to share the good and the bad.
Interestingly, the comments above seem to directly contradict comments made by
Carrie during her second and third interviews. While Carrie felt that Ernest was very accessible and available when he was first named to the vice-president’s position, she became more and more frustrated by her inability to schedule appointments or receive approval from Ernest as time passed. Ernest makes his own appointments. During his interview, he stated that he does not like to be tied to a schedule; rather, he wants to be free to wander and talk with his staff members.
Unfortunately, the inability to schedule appointments means that his staff may not be able to reach him for days at a time. I l l
Paradoxically, however, Ernest does not want his managers to "do their own thing." As he said,
It just will not work unless everybody knows what everybody’s doing and you work as a team. And if you don’t want to do that-and I tell them very point blank—if you don’t want to work that way.. .you should think about going someplace else.
At the same time, Ernest recognizes that the type of work performed by development professionals often requires them to be out of the office and working independently a good deal of the time. Fund-raising personnel must often travel to other cities and states to meet with donors, alumni groups, and other external constituencies. As a result, Ernest feels the need to have staff members he can trust. While he expects to have ultimate authority over their actions, and must approve any written materials before they are sent out, Ernest also believes in giving his staff some freedom and autonomy to do their jobs. On the other hand, if a manager’s performance seems to be deficient, or if fund-raising efforts do not go as well as anticipated, Ernest stated that "I get interested very quickly."
Another aspect of Ernest’s management philosophy is his belief in empowering his staff members. This can be a time-consuming process, but Ernest feels it is important for middle managers to believe in their abilities and to have confidence in their performance. He accomplishes this, in part, by telling staff members to do something and then reaffirming his belief that they can achieve the goals he has set for them. As a result, he feels his staff members are more productive and more energized than they were under the previous vice president. 112
On the whole, Ernest views his style of communication as being very direct.
When a problem arises, or when a disagreement occurs, Ernest prefers to talk things out and resolve problems as quickly as possible. This is a trait that he tries to instill in his subordinates, as well. He recounted a recent incident concerning a difference of opinion between Carrie and another of his middle managers, and seemed pleased that Carrie handled the situation the same way he would have. While Ernest wants direct communication, he does not wish to see confrontation. In fact, open confrontation should be avoided. One piece of advice that Ernest gives to managers, and especially to the women on his staff, is "to learn how to play poker. And don’t reveal it, don’t confront [someone] and say 'Why did you do that to me?”’
Ernest concluded the interview by pointing out a personality trait of his that he feels is very important to understanding his perspective on his job. According to Ernest, one major difference between him and other administrators or managers in higher education is that
I am not threatened. I’ve had one very successful career...and I didn’t come in here looking to be a vice-president. I didn’t come in here to really work very long. And that gives you a different perspective. Where a lot of people are looking back over their shoulder, worrying about whether I have a job or I don’t have a job, I don’t care....My objective is to do the job for the university, and for the Board, and for the president.
Ernest stated that a "nomadic" lifestyle is common among development professionals, who generally stay with an institution for less than five years. In his own case, because of his career stage and his financial circumstances, this seems to 113 be especially true. Thus, when he feels his time is up, or that he can no longer help the institution, he is free to leave. This perspective appears to give Ernest the freedom to do what he feels is best for the institution, regardless of whether his actions or decisions are popular with other staff members. CHAPTER VI
DATA ANALYSIS: DICTIONARY KNOWLEDGE
All interview transcripts were examined and coded using Sackmann’s (1991,
1992) categories of cognitions or types of knowledge. Interview segments were coded as belonging to dictionary, directory, recipe or axiomatic knowledge; segments that appeared to contain more than one type of knowledge (i.e., directory and recipe, or recipe and axiomatic) were assigned multiple codes.
The data coding went through many iterations; over time and with the addition of data from subsequent interviews, several categories and themes emerged that were not evident at the beginning of the study. As with Sackmann’s (1991,
1992) research, there are some common themes within the different categories of cultural knowledge. However, the themes and dimensions evident in this research did not always match those in Sackmann’s study, for reasons which will be discussed further in Chapter 11.
114 115
Dictionary Knowledge
The category of dictionary knowledge was mostly a litany of what middle managers do, or their perceptions about what others in the organization do.
Occasionally, dictionary knowledge was accompanied by directory information about how middle managers perform their tasks. Dictionary knowledge was the second- smallest category of knowledge demonstrated in this study, and was largely evident in the first or second interviews (see Appendix B). During the third round of interviews, only one middle manager made a statement that could be categorized as dictionary knowledge.
Sackmann’s (1991,1992) research identified two dimensions and five themes within dictionary knowledge, as shown below:
Table 1. Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) Dictionary Dimensions and Themes
DICTIONARY Dimensions: Themes: KNOWLEDGE * concrete/abstract * Goals & * intentions/realizations accomplishments * Corporate structure * Relationship between the organization and the employees * Strategy
All of the dimensions and themes in Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) research were seen as occurring at the organizational level. In contrast, the two major dimensions that 116 appeared in this study were personal and impersonal dictionary knowledge.
Similarly, the themes that emerged related to either personal or impersonal dictionary knowledge.
Personal Dictionary Knowledge
The particular themes that are seen within the personal dimension appear in statements regarding individuals’ perceptions of their jobs, duties, and position within the organization. These statements reflect a descriptive, factual perspective; the middle manager describes what happens or is supposed to happen, and not necessarily how he or she actually accomplishes any given task.
Three different themes regarding personal dictionary knowledge were evident in the statements made by the middle managers: (1) descriptions of job duties or responsibilities that are unique to the individual; (2) how the individual perceives or interprets his/her position within the organization; (3) strategies utilized by the individual in carrying out his or her job.
The first theme, that of job duties, largely contained statements regarding the particular tasks that a middle manager performed in his or her position. Most of the comments in this regard related to tasks that are specific to the position itself, and thus were also considered to be "impersonal" knowledge about the office in general.
Other tasks and responsibilities related specifically to the job incumbent, and were the result of specialized knowledge or abilities that he or she brought to the position. 117
Personal perceptions or interpretations about one’s position were demonstrated in statements made throughout the first two rounds of interviews with middle managers. For example, Scott, Carrie, and Jay all expressed some frustration or personal concern regarding middle management roles at Midwestern.
Scott’s perceptions of his role at the university, particularly with regard to his ability to make decisions, seem to be somewhat negative:
...I’m responsible for reporting of physical problems in the residence halls, yet I have absolutely no power over the people that fix them....[Students] think that you’re the guy that’s in charge of the residence halls...therefore it’s your fault, your responsibility. And it is my responsibility, and at any given instance it may even be my fault, but there’s a lot of things that are out of my power to do anything about, (first interview)
Scott views his middle management position as having a great deal of responsibility, but no power to accomplish significant tasks on his own.
Carrie likewise expressed concerns regarding her position within the university’s hierarchy, especially as it affected others’ perceptions.
It makes a huge difference, really, who you’re working for, whether they put that kind of respect into your professional capability....[S]omebody at the top that is respecting your professional opinion. Looking at you as professionals....We’re the people with the expertise, with the knowledge....I see it more as facilitators, the ones who carry out the jobs that need to be done, (second interview)
Like Scott and Carrie, Jay made several comments that illustrated a disillusioned view of middle management, and particularly of his position at the university: 118
In some ways in this job I have less authority than I had in my previous job, and that’s OK, I don’t care necessarily about that, but I also realize that I can only go so far in working with the faculty on assessment, (second interview)
In addition, like Carrie and Scott, Jay must deal with his perception that the rest of the university tends to ignore the work performed by his office.
I don’t really think anyone read the report. I think the white papers that we send out, I don’t really think anyone particularly reads those. So I think that we are generating information; I think the university, and this is probably our fault, isn’t doing anything with the information, (third interview)
Thus, for Carrie, Scott, and Jay, the role of a middle manager at Multi-Purpose
Midwestern University seems to include an element of neglect on the part of the rest of the institution.
Joyce was the only middle manager who did not express frustration or concern over her status in the university’s hierarchy. As an example, Joyce made the following observations about her position as a middle manager at Multi-Purpose
Midwestern:
You do a whole lot of stuff without the headaches....You have the freedom to make choices and decisions, but you don’t have a lot of the downward pressure put on by other people....[Wjorking within this small little organization within the big one is just, suits me fine, (first interview)
Thus, Joyce appears to feel comfortable in her role as a middle manager. Her role within the organizational hierarchy permits her to do a job that she enjoys; at the same time, Joyce perceives herself to have a fair amount of freedom. While she 119 views upper administrators as operating "without a safety net," she appears not to see any such problems for herself in this regard.
The final theme in personal dictionary knowledge was that of strategies used in relation to basic job functions. Joyce and Carrie discussed strategies with regard to the basic descriptions of their jobs.
Joyce’s strategies relate directly to her role as a provider of information. As the individual in charge of data analysis for her department, as well as for other departments who request information, Joyce has had to make decisions about which information to include in various reports. One of the primary methods by which she makes these decisions is by examining her own experience: "I’ve pinpointed certain pieces of information that, through my past experience has been helpful." Her choice of when to provide information, as well as the volume of data made available, likewise has some strategic elements. For example, Joyce is responsible for collecting large volumes of data. She chooses to distribute the data during the summer for two reasons; first, the data collection is usually complete at this time, and second, summer is a slow period in her office.
Carrie likewise talked about strategic actions in both her first and second interviews. It appeared that Carrie used the same basic strategy, which was titled a "defensive" strategy, in different situations. In the first interview, Carrie mentioned that the Annual Fund was experiencing problems due to the university’s focus on its multi-million dollar capital campaign. In order to avoid being blamed 120
for the downturn in Annual Fund dollars, Carrie conducted research on the
experiences of other Annual Fund directors who had been in the same situation:
I have a paper trail two inches thick about.. .it’s happening, here’s what we’re seeing....Fortunately I had done a number of studies over the years to understand, I could answer the questions where the money went, (first interview)
Similarly, when Carrie wanted to restructure the operations of her office, she
met with her staff and developed a comprehensive plan for the future. The results
of that plan were put into chart form, and were displayed prominently in the office
so that each person would know whether a particular activity had or had not occurred as scheduled. Thus,
...everybody knows what the other person is doing, or supposed to be doing, if there’s any question on what should be happening right about now, theoretically it should be on our calendar of activities that we constantly check off, and that will allow us to keep abreast of everybody and everything that’s going on. (second interview)
In this way, Carrie can check on her staffs activities and also demonstrate her own progress toward accomplishing the goals of the office.
Impersonal Dictionary Knowledge
The three themes that emerged within the impersonal dimension were the
duties and responsibilities of the office in general, the duties and responsibilities of
others in the university, and the middle manager’s perspectives on data or
information as it applies to his or her job. 121
Duties and responsibilities. As compared with the theme of duties and responsibilities found in the personal dimension, the same theme in the impersonal dimension refers to duties or responsibilities inherent in the office itself, regardless of the incumbent holding that particular office. Quite frequently, comments of this nature involved a description of one’s job title and the basic duties or tasks that were part of the position. Middle managers speaking from an impersonal perspective often referred to the office in the third person, as though it were separate from themselves. Examples of these statements include the following:
...then the Assessment Center, that is, Institutional Research...is going to be providing various kinds of reports for various departments as they go through a program review process....What we’re doing at the Assessment Center is we have an assessment program that involves entering freshmen, sophomores, and seniors. And it’s surveys, tests, what have you, to look at the kinds of changes that are taking place over time. (Jay, first interview)
That would include the reporting of any physical concerns, monitoring the programmatic aspects of it, meaning the residence life staff, hall director, RAs. Their selection, training, supervision, and then handling discipline problems, and then doing room assignments...And then coordinating vending services...I also do meal pass, I monitor the meal count, and I do meal pass issuing and monitoring as to who has what meal pass. (Scott, first interview)
The director of the annual fund typically will, throughout a year’s time, have a series of requests of the alumni base to get the annual fund report. For instance, mine starts out in the fall, with a phoneathon, and then we do a year-end...solicitation. Then we’ll do, if we still haven’t heard from them or haven’t been able to reach them on the phone, we’ll try again on the phone. Then we’ll follow up with another solicitation letter in April, May, right before the fiscal year ends. (Carrie, first interview) 122
Most of the information contained in these statements reflects standard operating procedure for the particular office. Similar offices at other universities probably operate in a manner comparable to that described by middle managers at Multi-
Purpose Midwestern.
Duties and responsibilities of others. Impersonal dictionary knowledge is also used to describe the activities of other individuals or offices within the institution, especially as they relate to the office of the middle manager being interviewed. This knowledge was occasionally combined with directory knowledge because the middle manager was describing how they interacted with the other offices on campus. For the most part, however, this knowledge was limited to a description of the location or reason for working with other offices within the institution:
I’ve seen that in a number of different settings, where somebody says, well, this particular donor is interested in supporting the music program, and somebody will say, well I can set up a special dinner for them prior to the next concert to meet with the president, to feed into that, and that’s their job. (Carrie, first interview)
...[Varsity coaches] also have to understand they’ve got to read what the [application status] is before they assume that everyone on that printout’s an accepted student. So that kind of education has to go back and forth so that they’re fully versed in what those printouts mean. (Joyce, second interview)
It falls, really, in two areas. It depends if you’re talking about a decision that would fall within the purview of the resource management area, or if it falls in the area of student services....I will be working with...resource management because if anything physical in the building, anything needs to be fixed or repaired or anything like that, the Finance office for billing and billing adjustments, people move in late, people that leave early, people that change meal plans, anything along those lines. (Scott, second interview) 123
Thus, this type of dictionary knowledge is independent of the particular individuals with whom the middle manager must relate. Rather, it is impersonal in nature and reflects the overall level of interaction required with other offices in order to accomplish one’s normal job duties.
Perspectives on data and information. The third theme within the impersonal dimension of dictionary knowledge is that of the middle manager’s perspective on data and information in his or her job. This cultural knowledge theme emerged during the second round of interviews with middle managers:
I wouldn’t have a paper trail on the fiscal side of [a residence hall that was renovated]. That would be controlled by the resource management, but I can get that if I wanted to. But I would have a paper trail as to, yes, I buy so many mattresses a year, so many beds a year, and where they went....So I’ve got that kind of paper trail. (Scott, second interview)
I guess we are a data gathering, or information generating office. We periodically generate what we’ve come to call "white papers" on when we have all the freshmen assessment results in we do a paper to the university community that tells them what we have found. And then, basically, throughout the year we’ll get calls from [senior administrators] saying, we need information about this, we need information about that, can you get it for us. And so we go ahead, and either using data that we’ve got here or integrating our data with data that’s held in the main computer system, then we can do the kinds of reports that they need or want. (Jay, second interview)
We’ll provide information at certain times throughout the year, for example in the summer there’s a great deal of information that we provide. I mean, the summer studies that we do is [sic] really pretty comprehensive. (Joyce, second interview)
While the managers would later discuss how information or data were used, and what strategies they employed for analyzing and sharing data with their superiors, 124 it was interesting that their relationship to data formed part of their definition of what they did within the university.
Summary
Knowledge of a dictionary nature occurred most often during the first two rounds of interviews. The overall number of responses that could be classified as dictionary knowledge was fairly small. The only category that was smaller was that of axiomatic knowledge, which is discussed in Chapter Nine.
For the most part, dictionary knowledge focused on the definitions of job duties or responsibilities, either for the middle manager or for others in the university. The knowledge expressed was generally impersonal in nature and took the form of lists or general tasks to be performed. Joyce and Carrie also discussed some of their strategies for accomplishing particular job tasks. Joyce’s strategies related to her decisions regarding which information to include in reports, and when to release this data. Carrie’s strategic dictionary knowledge related to her desire to avoid being blamed for mistakes or the actions of other people in her office.
In addition to Joyce, the other middle managers also expressed dictionary knowledge as it related to their perspectives on information and data. However, these perspectives pertained only to the basic functions of the middle manager’s job.
Thus, the statements were likely to focus on the fact that the office as a whole is 125 expected to obtain and process information, or that information processing is considered part of the middle manager’s job description.
Whether dictionary knowledge can be considered a defining characteristic of middle managers is unknown at this time. However, the interview data would tend to suggest that middle managers focused more on both the personal and impersonal dictionary knowledge relevant to their jobs than did the decision makers. The latter group, for the most part, briefly summarized their job responsibilities and spent the majority of the interview talking about other types of knowledge. CHAPTER VII
DIRECTORY KNOWLEDGE
Overview of Dimensions and Themes in Directory Knowledge
Directory knowledge was the largest category of cultural knowledge
expressed by the middle managers in this study, as shown in Appendix B.
Directory knowledge refers to two primary areas: the first relates to the methods by which individuals accomplish their tasks or objectives, while the second area is the personal and hierarchical interrelationships between individuals within the organization (and occasionally outside it, as well). These themes can be restated as processes and relationships. Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) research indicated that both of these areas of cultural knowledge are major themes within the category of directory knowledge.
During the second round of interviews for this study the definition of directory information took on a slightly different perspective. While middle managers still discussed their relationships with other individuals or offices, a distinct sense of strategy also came into play. This is different from Sackmann’s
(1991, 1992) experience; in discussing how the participants in her study accomplished tasks, Sackmann referred to the sub-themes of autonomy and
126 127 teamwork. Sackmann’s participants apparently did not discuss strategies. In fact,
Sackmann’s framework includes strategy only as an organizational-level component of cultural knowledge within the dictionary category.
In addition, directory knowledge in this study is further distinguished by the presence of two different dimensions of directory knowledge. The first dimension concerns whether the processes or relationships are internal or external to the middle manager. Internal, in this sense, refers to processes or relationships that occur within the middle manager’s immediate office; these processes or relationships are carried out both with subordinates and with the middle manager’s immediate supervisor.
A process or relationship is considered external when it involves individuals or groups outside of the middle manager’s immediate office. Thus, a relationship with faculty members or individuals in other offices on campus is considered external, even though everyone involved belongs to the same organization.
Likewise, activities or processes that involve the president or Board of Trustees are external because these activities are beyond the scope of the middle manager’s office.
The second dimension deals with the means by which the middle manager acts on his or her directory knowledge, and is closely related to the theme of strategy. The options for action or strategy appeared to be either direct or indirect action. A direct action is one that is fairly explicit. A direct action or strategy 128 involves some action or statement made by the individual which directly influences or accomplishes a desired goal.
Indirect actions, on the other hand, appear to be more circuitous. These types of strategies involve behind-the-scenes actions, or are demonstrated by suggestions made to others, the intent of which is to influence people in a decision making role. Thus, rather than the middle manager taking the action or making the decision, they accomplish their tasks by influencing the actions or decisions of others.
Process Knowledge
During the first two rounds of interviews, and to a lesser extent in the third round, all of the middle managers discussed how they performed certain components of their jobs. The emphasis on process knowledge paralleled that found in
Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) research.
Process knowledge focused on how activities or processes were performed, and often included some reference to other actors. The differentiation between processes and relationships in this category is that these other individuals or offices are often used as the means of accomplishing the particular task or process. The various activities or means used by middle managers in this study, from a process standpoint, are illustrated in the following table: 129
Table 2. Themes in Directory Knowledge and Resulting Process Knowledge
FOCUS DIRECT PROCESS INDIRECT PROCESS
Internal * Make information * Make information Focus processing choices processing choices (inclusion, exclusion, (inclusion, exclusion, interpretation) interpretation) * Learn boss’s priorities * Obtain staff involvement * Provide input to decision in office decisions makers (coaptation)
External * Work with other offices * End run (involve other Focus (when requested) offices) * Facilitate involvement of * Gain approval from others several decision * Make information makers processing choices (inclusion, exclusion, interpretation) * Be aware of external constituencies and their expectations
Internal indirect process knowledge. Both female middle managers made statements involving process knowledge that was both internally focused and utilized indirect actions. Joyce appears to use the indirect approach when she provides data or information to others, especially staff members within her office, as indicated by the following comments: 130
A lot of it is getting information that would make sense to them... then be able to decipher what they need to know. There is-when you break it down like that, there really isn’t a science to that. And in certain areas, I’ll, we’ll be able to provide as much information as needed, and then people can draw their own conclusions, (second interview)
Thus, in some situations Joyce will provide information that she believes will be useful, but will not interpret or explain the information to other staff members.
In addition, while Joyce will normally provide Frank, her boss, with information exactly as requested-which would be a direct action--she has also on occasion provided information different from that requested. Therefore, when Joyce is not providing information in the form of a standardized report, she may exercise some latitude in deciding which information to pass along to her supervisor:
The standardized reports that happen every week, pretty much come out in the same way, the same form of presentation. About the only way that I can influence at that point is to look at it and perhaps suggest a different interpretation of it. You know, "do you think that this means such-and-such?"....Yes, there are times when I can pull together what he wants but also either provide additional information or present it in a different way that would then cause him to look at it in a, from a different perspective...and perhaps influence whatever decision he would have, (second interview)
Here, then, is an example of a middle manager possibly influencing the decisions of a superior through the types of data that she provides to that decision maker.
Carrie also speaks of internal process knowledge that appears to follow the indirect approach. When she wanted to reorganize some of the activities and responsibilities within the office, Carrie involved her staff and "let" them come up with a solution; in the meantime, Carrie had already decided upon the solution that 131
she wanted to implement. Carrie’s process for involving the staff involved putting
all staff responsibilities on a board and asking the staff to indicate where changes
in tasks or responsibility could occur. By doing this, Carrie gave her staff a chance
to see for themselves whether changes were needed, and in which areas, and thus
helped them not only to "buy in" to the solution, but to have some ownership of the
solution as well. She reported that this process had been very successful, and had
worked exactly as she had planned.
Internal direct process knowledge. Three of the four middle managers talked
about knowledge that could be considered internal, direct process knowledge. Only
Jay did not make any statements of this type.
Joyce made several statements regarding how she decides upon the processes or activities on which she will concentrate her efforts. For instance, as she discussed her choices for providing information to other staff members, she made the following remarks:
And how do we decide what gets included in that? It’s mostly Frank’s past experience, information that the counselors say they want to look at, you know, what about, what happened with this, or what was the yield on that? (second interview)
However, while it appears that Frank, Joyce’s boss, has a lot of influence in how she carries out her job duties, Joyce stated during the third interview that this was not the case. As Joyce noted, "[T]he guidelines on how to get those things accomplished are very loose, and so each individual person can exercise creativity
in how they attack the problem." Thus, Joyce perceives a great deal of freedom in 132 her ability to make decisions regarding how she plans to carry out her work assignments.
At one point in her career at Multi-Purpose Midwestern, Carrie would have enjoyed having her boss tell her what to do rather than expecting her to develop and carry out plans for particular projects. Over time, however, Carrie has adjusted to
Ernest’s style of management, and has consequently developed new ways of dealing with him and with her job:
And that’s what he did with me. He brought me up, "You can do it, you’ve proven it to me, and you’ve developed a plan, I’ve overseen that process, now do it." And you know, I couldn’t get in to see him, I couldn’t get him to answer questions, I wanted to constantly, getting him to tell me what to do in the next step, and he’s like, "No, I’m not going to do it"....[B]ut I guess I’ve learned, though...that you only pick two or three things that you absolutely, it’s essential that you talk to him, and you keep working with him on it, and you catch him in the hall and you make him stay and talk to you and you say things like, "No, I’m not leaving because I’m not done talking to you."
This statement, made during Carrie’s third interview, reveals a fairly significant change in the manner in which she works with and reports to Ernest, her boss.
While she is talking about her relationship to her boss, she is also illustrating how that relationship has altered her process knowledge. She appears to have changed much of her process knowledge, in that she no longer depends on Ernest to tell her what to do at every turn; rather, she now approaches him only when she considers his input "essential." Otherwise, she will take care of the process or task as she sees fit. 133
Scott’s internal process knowledge likewise indicates something about his working relationship with his boss, George:
I think I’ve gotten a feel for what he thinks is important, and I address that. I’ve never told him I won’t do something. I may discuss it with him beforehand, but I’ll, whatever he gives me to do gets done, and it usually gets done promptly, (third interview)
Scott is aware of the issues or topics on which George tends to focus, and he makes sure that these topics or concerns receive the bulk of his attention, as well.
A discussion of the manner in which decisions are made also indicates some degree of internal process knowledge. Scott was the middle manager who tended to discuss decision making most often, as in the following comments:
If it falls in the area of student services, I would say my input is sought, I would say that it’s probably given consideration, I would say that I’m in on the decision-making process, even though I may not be the one that actually makes the decision. And after that, I may be asked to follow up on it. (second interview)
Scott also indicated that there are many decisions that affect his area but in which he is not included. More will be said about these situations in the next section.
External indirect process knowledge. Carrie and Scott both made statements that reflected an indirect approach to external constituencies with regard to process knowledge.
Scott spoke a great deal about decision-making processes at his level of the administration. One topic that was repeated often was that of having little or no power to accomplish the responsibilities of his job; he is not in a position to make other offices perform as he thinks they should in order to support the functions of 134
his office. Since he cannot order or force another department, particularly the
maintenance area, to make repairs to the residence halls, he must rely instead on a
more indirect approach:
[I]f Physical Plant doesn’t do it, [there’s] not a thing I can do about it. Or what happens is that, after two or three times...we start going up the ladder, where we’ll probably go up to the Provost and then that can cross over to the Vice-President of Resource Management and then works its way back down. So that’s about the only way you can get any resolution, if you run into a real problem, (first interview)
It is interesting that this was one of the comments to which Scott objected in his
profile; he felt that this statement made him appear manipulative. Shown in the
context of other middle managers and their indirect approaches to process
knowledge, however, this statement reveals that networking with other offices and
individuals is just another tool that middle managers can use to accomplish their
objectives.
Carrie demonstrated a different form of indirect process knowledge in dealing with her supervisor and other administrators on major projects. As stated previously, she feels the need to check with many decision makers before releasing
a mailing or promotional piece to the public. This manner of gaining approval fits her style of management well, and also serves a useful purpose: Carrie is unlikely
to be blamed or held accountable for something going wrong if others shared in the
final decision and had input into the entire process. 135
One, if they want to see it, that’s perfectly fine with me and two, nobody can come back to me and say I didn’t do it right. If it doesn’t work, if it goes out in the mail and it doesn’t work, it wasn’t completely my idea alone, (second interview)
Carrie’s desire for approval reflects her desire to avoid being blamed for any mistakes. Her method for obtaining approval from other administrators is likewise very indirect:
[T]he hardest thing to do is, you do the letter, you finalize it and get it checked off on by everybody, and then you never show it to them again. [Laughs] Because they might be in a completely different mood when they see it a month later....[After the letter is sent] You don’t go around showing the letter with their initials on it...and if they don’t remember doing it, in November when they finally see it in the mail, and they’re ticked off that something got in there, but they don’t remember seeing it, there’s kind of, well, you know, take the punches. You know they saw it but you’re not going [to say] "Well, I have proof." [Laughs again] It doesn’t behoove you. (second interview)
External direct process knowledge. The external and direct dimensions appeared to comprise the largest portion of process knowledge statements among middle managers. Each middle manager made statements that could be so classified.
For example, Jay spoke about how his office will work with other departments on campus to help analyze their mission statements and enable them to focus on assessment issues. The project is already under way, and Jay’s office has assisted some of the academic departments with their analyses. Jay went into further detail about how this process takes place: 136
Well, we don’t tell them, we sit down and we listen. W e’ve done some consulting with the business department already on helping them write their mission statement, giving them ideas and feedback and what have you....And it’s proven to be very, very helpful, not that we told them what [to do], but we kind of put on counseling hats and we just sat and listened and we’d ask, have you thought about this or have you thought about that? It’s been that kind of process, (third interview)
In addition, Jay helped conduct part of the annual Faculty Retreat, in which faculty members were supposed to analyze the operations of a fictional department:
And what they did was to react to some simulations....And we broke the faculty into 18 groups of eight or nine in a group, and there was a leader, and they had to work with, the group had to work through things. We gave all the full-time faculty the new Cross and Angello book on classroom assessment, as well as a series of other readings that I had come up with, so that they all had this, and this information was being fed to the faculty throughout the summer... (third interview)
Thus, Jay created the environment and structured the information to be used by faculty as they learned to work with assessment techniques and became more familiar with the issues involved in classroom assessment.
Joyce’s interviews provided several good examples of the distinction between direct and indirect actions or strategies. Many of Joyce’s comments referred to her role as a manager of information, and the dilemmas that that role can impose: "You have to present the right information, but so that it’s not incorrect or deceiving, but there’s a time and a place for it." In addition, one must consider the after effects of information that is released.
I mean, really, the choices are you don’t share it, you put it in, in a format that they can comprehend and won’t be dangerous, or you spend the time educating them as to what it means, (second interview) 137
The choice of whether and how to release information appeared to relate to the possible impact that such information could have.
Joyce also indicated that she uses information as a means to an end; she realizes that her opinions, by themselves, may not be persuasive to someone making a decision. However, if she can find and provide information that strengthens her viewpoint, she knows that this will go a long way toward convincing others that her position is appropriate:
I think people who are information/data oriented are ones who, if there’s proof in the numbers, then they can believe it. And so, if I’m able to build a case based on actual data, then they’ll be more persuaded than me simply coming in and saying, "Oh, I think we should do it this way."
In addition to providing data to staff members in her own office, Joyce also occasionally supplies both information and an interpretation of that information for data recipients.
[T]he first year that we distributed the [survey] results, I gave several presentations around campus to explain what I meant and again, I talked a lot about this is information that is one year’s worth of data, and that you cannot, I mean, you may make some modification to what you’re doing, but you can’t completely change what you’re doing based on one year’s worth of information, (second interview)
The survey results of which Joyce was speaking contained some information that was potentially damaging to the University’s fund-raising efforts; Joyce and Frank decided to suppress this information. Joyce apparently felt the need to explain the information that was included in the survey report so that it would not be taken out of context. 138
Since Joyce depends, to a great extent, on computer-based data, she has
developed a network of data contacts outside of her office. When she needs
information that is not available within the Admissions office, Joyce goes to staff
members in other offices who are computer-literate. Her choices for obtaining
information from these other sources are based on "whoever I’ve found who has the
most information or who can get it."
Although Carrie and Joyce deal with the public every day as part of their
respective positions, Scott spent a great deal of time discussing the impact of external constituencies-in this case, parents--on his job responsibilities.
I tell my staff that on opening day, we’re not opening for those students. They want their key and they want to sit down and they want mom and dad to leave them alone. We’re opening for mom and dad. They’re the ones that are looking, so when you’re cleaning that room, you clean it how you think your mother would walk into it and look at it, and make sure that it’s clean. And when you greet someone at the desk, you greet them as the way that you know your mother would want to be greeted, (second interview)
Scott is very aware that parents are scrutinizing the residence halls and grounds carefully as they help their children move to college. Thus, he encourages his staff to consider the perspective of an outsider as they prepare for the opening of the residence halls each year.
Scott also appeared to have a fairly straightforward view of the decision making process of the institution, especially with regard to the development of departmental budgets. 139
Because of the way this institution is governed, or not governed, depending on who you talk to, there is no power structure in this institution. There isn’t. I’ve said that for years. All decisions here are vested in two people. Three, actually. Vice-president for Resource Management, Provost, and the president. That’s it. So how much politics can you play? (second interview)
As a result of this perspective, Scott said that he does not spend much time trying to influence the decisions of senior administrators. Rather, he said that he tries to concentrate on those aspects of his job over which he seems to have control.
Carrie’s comments regarding external entities and their impact on her job processes focused on either volunteers or other Annual Fund directors at various institutions. Due to the nature of Carrie’s position, it is very important to obtain committed volunteers to help solicit alumni and other contributors. Thus, Carrie spends a fair amount of time and energy developing the volunteer network and training volunteer chairpersons.
Relationships
As shown in the following table, the theme of "relationships" in directory knowledge can refer to three different levels of relationships, and can refer either to individuals within or outside of the immediate office. One level involves the relationships between individuals; when these relationships occur within the same office, they are considered internal. If the other individuals work in different offices on campus, then these are considered external peers. The second level refers to the relationships between offices or groups of stakeholders. These types of 140 relationships, by definition, can only occur externally. The third level of relationships focuses on reporting relationships between the middle manager and others in the institutional hierarchy. The latter category includes individuals in positions above as well as below the middle manager.
Table 3. Themes in Directory Knoweldge and Resulting Relationship Knowledge
Relationship Level
2nd Level- 3rd Level- 1st Level--Peers Offices Hierarchical
Internal * Relationships n/a * Reporting Focus with staff relationships (above and below the middle manager) * Support for/from boss
External * Relationships * Boundary * Organizational Focus with peers in issues with hierarchy other offices other offices * Support from * Relationships external with faculty professionals * Networks on campus
Depending upon the location and level of the other offices or individuals about whom the middle manager was speaking, relationship knowledge could reflect either an internal or an external dimension. Again, internal refers to those within 141
the same office area, from subordinates up to the immediate supervisor, while external relationships can include those off-campus or at the highest levels of administration.
Internal relationship knowledge. While all of the middle managers talked about situations that involved this type of knowledge, Carrie and Joyce made the vast majority of these kinds of comments; Jay and Scott, by contrast, made very few.
Sackmann (1991, 1992) noted that directory knowledge concerning relationships can focus on reporting relationships and also on relations between employees, or between employees and customers. Many of the comments which were categorized as relationship knowledge in this study followed Sackmann’s
(1991, 1992) framework; the middle managers either focused on reporting relationships or else expressed a great deal of support for their bosses and their colleagues.
Scott’s internal relationship knowledge was limited to a description of his reporting relationship to his immediate supervisor. Jay, on the other hand, had several positive comments for his co-worker and for his supervisor, Richard:
I think Richard is very pleased with the people who he has down here. [My colleague’s] personality is totally opposite of mine: he’s extremely research-oriented. I know the university. So I think, hand in hand, we can play a good role. I think Richard, maybe more than anyone else on the campus, sees the significance and importance of the assessment process, (third interview) 142
Throughout the interviews, Jay consistently praised Richard and his co-worker in the office and noted that their support had played a major role in the development of the Assessment Center to date.
Carrie’s directory comments during the first interview focused largely on her relationship with her boss and with her own staff. In the second interview, however, Carrie’s explanation of how she carried out tasks more often than not included some reasoning as to why that particular approach was desirable, and how it served to accomplish a specific objective. Several of Carrie’s comments also reflected an attempt on her part to try to understand the moods and desires of her boss. It seemed that she was trying to rationalize his actions, particularly when he was not responsive or available to deal with problems or concerns that Carrie raised.
Examples of these statements, from the second interview, are as follows:
[T]he new manager is much better at it, but he’s still caught up within the constraints of the institution. There’s some bigger things happening that he thinks that you ought to hold off until this happens, and then that takes a million years to happen, so then your project doesn’t happen. Or he looks at it and...depending on his mood, he starts to micro-manage.
I’m sure there’s a lot of big issues university-wide that are going on, much bigger issues than my one little letter....When you get one vice- president that’s handling 25 people and they’re also involved with other university aspects, there’s just so many things to put your hands on, and that need your help.
When asked whether the personality of her boss affected her job performance,
Carrie responded that that was indeed the case. 143
Carrie also said that she had been changing her own management style with
regard to her staff members, partly as a result of her relationship with her own boss.
During the first interview Carrie said that, as a result of her previous boss not
involving her in decisions or listening to her suggestions, she found that she acted
in a similar manner toward her main coordinator. Since Ernest’s arrival, however,
Carrie sees herself relating to her staff differently, as indicated in the following comments:
Just the other night, he [a staff member] and I sat down and I kind of openly talked with him about some concerns that I had...and I asked him, "Can you help me deal with this? Do you have any suggestions?" Now, before, it might have been a sense of pride, "Well, if I ask him, I’m implying that he’s a better manager than me, and I’m his boss and you can’t do that." Now it’s like, he’s got some skills that I can learn from, and in turn, if nothing else, it’s easier to talk out a process openly, to solve the problem rather than always thinking I have to solve it by myself and come to them with a solution....we weren’t talking openly...but maybe the other guy [her previous boss] just kind of isolated us. (second interview)
Over the course of the study, Carrie began to feel more empowered to make decisions and take action as a result of her working relationship with Ernest.
[T]he empowerment issue...feels really good. And I feel respected. And I feel he does look to me for my expertise and...there’s no putting me down, that kind of thing. So, he’s been standing behind me. (third interview)
This attitude is working its way into her relationships with her own staff, and Carrie
has now started trying to empower her subordinates.
Joyce also spoke of her boss, Frank; with Joyce’s comments, however, it was possible to see how that reporting relationship impacted her choices in her work. 144
When Frank first came to Multi-Purpose Midwestern University, Joyce felt a strong need to prove herself to him in order to secure her job.
I can remember conversations with [an admissions counselor at another university] on the phone, saying "I just don’t know what Frank wants." I probably said that.. .50 times. You know, and that does take a lot to understand. Particularly when you’re in a situation where we work so closely together, because what he needs from me is done on a daily basis, whereas he may not have as much interaction with any of the other counselors, (second interview)
While Joyce was busy trying to decipher Frank’s management style, she also recognized that he probably did not spend much, if any, time trying to understand her work style. As she noted, "[I]t probably depends on the person who is the boss, whether they care to figure out the person" working for them. As a result of this focus on proving herself, Joyce felt that her productivity for that particular year was probably lower than it had been previously.
External relationship knowledge. One aspect of relationships between offices in the institution is illustrated by concerns over boundary issues between departments. Jay, especially, seemed to have concerns about the responsibilities of other offices in relation to his own. Until two years ago, he held the top position in a different department on campus. Some individuals on campus seem to expect him to perform or have responsibility for many of the same tasks as before, while the incumbent in that office seems unsure of where the boundaries of her office lie: 145
There is a very muddy line between the [X] office and my office. She thinks that we should be doing more, and I think we’re doing enough. (first interview)
There really is a lot of confusion between the [X] office and my office as to what is the data that the [X] office should provide, what’s the data that we should be providing over here?....I really don’t know how much of it is her responsibility and how much of it is mine, (second interview)
You know, I came out of 17 years here being, I think, a very successful [head of X office]. I knew what it was all about, I knew the game plan, I knew how far I could go, what my limitations were. Simply because those were parameters that had been set by the faculty, by the administration. That’s not the case here, (third interview)
Jay appears to be struggling both with the responsibilities of his new position and with finding a fit or a niche for his office within the institution. These are issues that he plans to resolve after more of the assessment issues are settled.
Scott, likewise, expressed concerns over which activities or responsibilities truly belonged to his area, and which ones were more or less the result of accretion over the years.
Used to be here, when midterm grades came out, they were fed to the Counseling Center, and anybody below a certain grade point, the Counseling Center was supposed to call this person in and talk to them and see if they needed academic help. Well, that kind of sounds to me like something out of the academic area, but it wasn’t. It was in our area, (third interview)
Scott went on to say that, in the past, faculty members would contact students who had missed several days of classes during the term; now, faculty contact Scott’s office and expect his staff to speak with students regarding class absences or other academic-related problems. 146
The responsibilities of various offices within Scott’s division are also somewhat unclear. During a meeting of the Student Services office directors, Scott said he had a revelation regarding the role that the residence life office plays in the area of student services:
And as I listened to them all wail away, and moan and gnash their teeth, it happened to come to my mind that they all have their own specific concerns, but every time something happens around here, everybody looks at me and say, "Well, what are you doing in the residence halls about thaf!" Nobody looks at the Health Center and says "What are you doing about the residence halls?" Nobody looks at Minority Student [services] and says "What are you doing about the residence halls?" But everybody looks at the residence halls and says, "Well, what are you doing about anorexia nervosa and eating disorders? What are you doing about suicide concerns and depression? What are you doing about programming on the weekends?" I-well, my area, anyway-has to do a little bit of what everybody does, whereas they just have to do what they do. And every once in awhile may do it in my residence halls. Usually because we call them. So, my area has to get into everybody else’s area, (third interview; emphasis in original)
As stated previously, Scott’s area appears to be given the responsibility to carry out many tasks and oversee a large portion of the operations of Multi-Purpose
Midwestern University. The authority to actually perform those tasks or take care of those responsibilities, however, is not always evident. Thus, Scott must occasionally deal with parents or others outside the university who complain about the residence facilities, and yet he cannot ensure that their concerns will be addressed promptly. 147
Mom and Dad yell at me, but I cannot tell the repairman "Go fix that door," because I am not his supervisor. I have to tell Physical Plant, who tells that person "Go fix the door." And that holds true for Physical Plant, it holds true for cleaning, because I don’t supervise the cleaning people....I have no power over the—I’ll go and I can’t yell at them because I’m not even their contract supervisor. I don’t even sign the contracts. All I can do is relay the information that there is a concern, this parent has called, (first interview)
As a result of this type of situation, which Scott says permeates several aspects of his position, he has created networks of people among the faculty and in different offices. He approaches the members of these networks when he perceives a need for some action or decision that he himself will not be able to take. This aspect of
Scott’s directory knowledge will be discussed in more detail in the following section.
Carrie’s external relationship knowledge focused on two specific groups: other development professionals, and the Midwestern faculty. Carrie noted that, when a new problem or project arises, she will often contact Annual Fund directors who are part of a statewide network of development professionals.
I’ll call the annual fund directors and say, tell me what you do. How do you handle this? One example is the annual fund within a campaign....I called all over and those who had been in a campaign experienced a very moderate increase, and I was able to substantiate what I was saying two years ago [when she tried to raise the issue with her previous boss]....I’d say if you need information about something you don’t know about, that’s who you would want to start with, (second interview)
One advantage to using this group as a resource is that Carrie can obtain information fairly quickly and at no cost. Thus, rather than employing a consultant to help with 148 planning a new or unfamiliar type of project, Carrie can contact other professionals for their help and advice.
With regard to the faculty, Carrie said that there is a sense of division or friction between faculty and administration on the campus. This contrasts with the
"one big happy family" metaphor that the university uses to describe itself.
I don’t ever hear them say, make the complaints that I know they make. That I hear through the grapevine. But there just doesn’t seem that support. And you hear, for instance, when we expanded the development staff, there was a huge, huge resentment that we had money to hire more people, that they [faculty] weren’t getting the raises....[T]here is that rumble, that rumbling, that bothers me....I don’t see anybody giving me dirty looks because I’m in the administration, but you hear the rumbling, (first interview)
Jay also has some concerns about the relationships between faculty and administration. While on many occasions he has enjoyed good discussions with faculty, and has felt that faculty are willing to approach him with academic issues and ask for his advice, he nevertheless notes a sense of "nervousness" between faculty and administration in general.
I think there is a place for academic administrators, that they’re part of the team. They are a support service to the faculty....I think it’s unfortunate that...some faculty maybe don’t realize that or appreciate that, and I think there are some administrators that don’t appreciate what their role is....I think that there is...a nervousness between "What are the administrators doing?" and the administrators saying "What are the faculty doing?" (first interview)
Jay would much prefer that faculty and administration function as a team and work together more closely, but he is not sure that that is possible given the different orientations of faculty and administrative staff members. 149
Scott did not perceive an adversarial relationship between faculty and staff
at Midwestern. In fact, Scott mentioned that he often involved faculty in committees or activities related to his area, and that this worked to his advantage when he needed some extra pressure from faculty in order to obtain some action or decision favorable to his area.
Joyce barely mentioned the faculty in her interviews, and gave no indication of the relationship between faculty and administration. However, she did note that she has been helping to "educate" faculty as to what information is available through her office to help them in recruiting students.
[W]e’ve very much gotten them more involved...in terms of, when they want information that they can follow up with students or whatever, that they’re now very good in terms of asking, they know what to ask for and...will request that of us. Which is really nice, to have that, (second interview)
For the most part, Joyce focused on relationships with other offices on campus. She has established a network of individuals in other offices who have access to computers and appear to be computer-literate. When she needs help or information, she contacts the people in these positions for their assistance. One interesting aspect of this network is that it is predominantly comprised of women, although Joyce said that this was not intentional on her part.
I typically tend to network with people who I have the most communication with and back-and-forth with, and those people just happen to be women. Because of, by virtue of their position. It’s not that I seek them out, necessarily, but because the [positions] I have the most contact with outside this office, given my responsibilities, happen to be occupied by women, (third interview) 150
Thus, as is the case in her own office, when the director or department head is not seen as computer-literate, or does not have ready access to information, Joyce concentrates her networking efforts on individuals like herself who are capable of obtaining data from the computer system or their own records. Joyce often finds herself contacting secretaries or assistant directors in various offices, because these are the people who appear to be most capable of giving her the information she desires.
Hierarchical relationship knowledge was demonstrated in several of Jay’s comments regarding other members of the administration, particularly the university president. Jay’s office is located in a building across campus from the main administration building, so he does not see Midwestern’s president on a daily basis.
This is in contrast to Jay’s experience when he was the head of a different department; that office was located near the president’s office, so Jay saw the president several times a day.
In addition, Jay has been with the university for almost 20 years, and has known the current president since the latter was a faculty member. Jay senses a change in their relationship now that he is in a different position in the administration. 151
My gut tells me that his perceptions of me have changed since I came over here [to Assessment]. I’m--and I don’t mean that negatively or positively, I’m just saying that I think that now that I’m over in this role, and it’s something that he doesn’t comprehend, therefore he doesn’t really understand me, because I’m in a role that he doesn’t understand. And so I see our conversations, whenever we have them, or I see him walking across the campus...being a little bit more formal. I guess, because I’m in a different role, (third interview)
This affects both Jay’s interactions with the president, and also colors his perception as to the role or importance of Assessment in the overall scheme of the university. Because Jay feels that the president does not understand the assessment process, Jay sees himself as being in a rather precarious position. Without the president’s support, and also the support from top administrators and faculty members, assessment is not likely to gain widespread acceptance at Midwestern.
However, if the president appears not to understand or fully comprehend the assessment movement and the process involved in fully implementing a successful assessment program, then that support is not likely to be forthcoming. Thus, Jay must determine a way to make his old acquaintance familiar with and supportive of assessment in general. Jay hopes that sources external to the university will help in this endeavor:
I can’t go to him and say, "Zach, we’re going to have now a lesson on assessment." I think that it’s going to have to come through his wanting to know something. "God, I was at this meeting and they were talking about "X". And that has to do with assessment. Well, let me talk to [the Provost] or get hold of Jay or something and get them over here," and that sort of thing. I think...he’s going to want to know only as much as he needs to know, to make sure that what he does outside the confines of the university benefits his role of getting more money into the university, (third interview) 152 Strategy
With regard to directory knowledge, "strategy" in this study can refer to one of two situations. First, it is related to a middle manager’s deliberate use or involvement of other people or offices to reach some end. This is not to imply that the middle manager is manipulative, merely that the involvement or consideration of other individuals, either within or outside the university, is an important factor in his or her choice of action. Second, it can refer to the middle manager’s choice of some specific action to take in a given situation.
As with other categories of knowledge, the "strategy" theme has two dimensions. First, there is the internal versus the external dimension. Some strategies appear to be used when the situation of individuals involved are internal to the middle manager’s office, while others are employed more often with external constituencies or situations.
The second dimension involves direct versus indirect strategies. As before, direct strategies are overt, intentional, and action-oriented. The middle manager himself or herself is the primary actor in this type of strategy. In indirect strategies, on the other hand, the middle manager is not the primary actor. Rather, he or she attempts to work through others, either through suggestion or by involving other individuals who will ultimately take the desired action or make the desired decision.
Strategic directory knowledge can thus be pictured as follows: Table 4. Impact of Directory Knowledge on Strategy
STRATEGY FOCUS
INDIRECT DIRECT
Internal Facilitate/Orchestrate Defensive Information Control Pragmatic/Effective
External Legitimate Salesperson Facilitate/Orchestrate Defensive Networking Networking
It was often difficult to separate process and relationship knowledge from strategic knowledge. Many of the comments listed in this study thus far also appeared to contain a strategic components. Thus, the examples that will be cited in this section may in some cases sound familiar. As far as possible, however, I have tried to include separate instances of strategic knowledge not already mentioned elsewhere.
Indirect internal strategic knowledge. One of the most common strategies used was that of facilitation and orchestration. In this strategy, the middle manager seeks to assist or encourage other staff members to reach a pre-determined decision.
This can be accomplished by creating an environment conducive to staff involvement and encouraging or guiding the staffs input in such a way that the solutions reached match those already chosen by the middle manager. The key to this strategy is that the middle manager lets the other individuals involved believe that the decision they 154 have reached is novel, when in fact it is the decision that the middle manager had hoped they would reach.
Several illustrations of this strategy were seen in Carrie’s interviews. While
Carrie often talked about particular processes or tasks that needed to be accomplished, she often involved staff members in implementing the plans or completing the assignments. The examples she gave of how she involves others include the following:
The specific implementation was something that I still needed to develop, and when you come up with a skeleton of a plan, and they say "I think you ought to involve Don X here and you need to make sure and call Don Y"...well, that’s his input and that’s some specific things...[T]hose are things that I hadn’t thought of, so we were able to move on with the general concept into a specific plan without my ideas having to change. It doesn’t change the structure of anything I had developed, (second interview)
What happened was, it was beautiful, it was one of those, the idea was pulled off and everybody else thinks it’s their idea. What I wanted to happen out of this meeting was to realign some of the responsibilities [of her staff members] I can see that they just needed to realign....So...we looked at the big picture, we looked at our own plan, we took our plan and tore it apart and put it back together, and then we said, here’s the bigger topics, what needs to happen within our office....And I just threw them all up on the board...and then I said, you know, I’m thinking as we go that maybe we need to realign some of these, and by the time we were done [staff members were saying] "well, I can do that, I can help out there"....And it was just exactly how I envisioned it. (second interview)
Carrie’s strategy, then, appears to be that she plants a seed or begins the discussion on a specific topic, and then allows others to develop the idea. At the same time, however, the idea or plan that ultimately emerges is one that Carrie had envisioned 155 all along. Thus, she appears to facilitate or orchestrate the group’s decision, in accordance with what she herself has already decided should be done.
Joyce, on the other hand, uses the control of information as an indirect means of dealing with individuals within her office area. While she will generally provide
Frank with the information he requests, in the form in which he requested it, she has on occasion "been in situations like that where I’ve been able to kind of control the outcome based on the information that I provide." These types of situations were apparently more common under her previous boss, in part because he was not as good a consumer of information as is Frank.
On the other hand, Joyce can sometimes influence the decision reached, or at least cause Frank to consider the particular situation from a different angle, based on the information she provides to him.
There are times when I can pull together what he wants but also either provide additional information or present it in a different way that would then cause him to look at it...from a different perspective, (second interview)
Likewise, Joyce can affect the decisions reached by staff members within her office by the types and amount of information she provides to them. She will provide data that, in her experience, fits the need of the person requesting the information. At the same time, however, she will not necessarily provide an interpretation of that data; rather, she will leave it up to the individual to "draw their own conclusions."
Direct internal strategic knowledge. Two of the middle managers indicated that they dealt with some office situations in a direct manner. For Carrie, the 156 strategy most often used in situations involving her boss, especially, could be described as defensive. Her objective in these situations appeared to be to avoid blame for decisions or actions that might be questioned after the fact. In some cases
Carrie was "pro-active,” in that she prepared reports in advance to help prevent being blamed later:
I kept saying that, through research that I had done with my peers, that the Annual Fund needed to be not only a component of the campaign, but the primary component... .1 basically wasn’t listened to and wasn’t listened to. I have...a paper trail two inches thick about, it’s happening, here’s what we’re seeing... .[T]his went on and this went on and I was reassured that...it was OK, you know, this is what we’re expecting. And then that vice-president left and the new vice- president... came along and said, "Oh my God, your Annual Fund’s down!" Really? Gee, what a surprise to me. No, but fortunately, I had done a number of studies over the years to understand, and I could answer the questions where the money went, (first interview)
Carrie anticipated that the decreases in the Annual Fund, which were due largely to the capital campaign underway at the time, would be questioned by upper administration. Although she tried to inform the administration that this was a natural consequence of the capital fund drive, she was not able to gain an audience.
As a result, she investigated the experiences of other annual fund directors and prepared reports to show that these decreases were common among institutions undertaking a major fund drive.
In addition, Carrie consults several administrators, and especially her boss, before releasing letters or printed materials soliciting for funds. In spite of this tactic, she is occasionally chastised for the appearance or content of a mailing. 157
Rather than simply accepting this censure, Carrie will let her boss know that "you realize he’s human, but...don’t start kicking my butt about something that’s, you know, you had ample opportunity to change." Her methods for dealing with her boss in these situations are subtle, but she manages to "slip it in there" when she knows that he has contributed to or approved the project in advance.
Scott, too, utilizes a defensive strategy on occasion. He will inform his boss,
George, when he sees or hears something that may ultimately reach the president.
So I keep [George] informed of many things that he probably, maybe doesn’t even need to be informed about. But I’ll inform him anyway. He makes the decision, then, as to whether the Provost or the president needs to know. But there’s a lot of times when I’ll see things and knowing what I know about being around here....if we can head it off, let the president know in advance, and then address it, we can avoid that problem. (Scott, third interview)
Scott indicated that the size of the institution, and the tendency of parents or other outside constituents to telephone the president or upper administrators directly with their concerns, makes it necessary for him to utilize this type of strategy.
Scott and Carrie both also use strategies that can be defined as pragmatic or practical; when speaking of situations wherein a practical solution or strategy is used, Scott and Carrie both described the matter very factually.
I have to understand that there’s a difference, that sometimes the decisions don’t go our way, because there...are other goods of the university. You can’t get isolated in your own little area and expect to survive. (Scott, second interview)
I asked a question, I got the answer, half an hour later I was back in the office making a plan for it. (Carrie, first interview) 158
[I]f it’s a project that you know how to do it but you need to implement it, then of course you would go to your volunteer base or you would go to your peers within one department or the school. (Carrie, second interview)
In each of these examples, other people are involved in the strategy. It is the straightforward attitude expressed within these statements that categorizes them as pragmatic or practically-oriented.
Indirect external strategic knowledge. As mentioned previously, Carrie must often work through a volunteer group in order to raise money for the Annual Fund.
She will sometimes employ a facilitator/orchestrator strategy with these individuals, similar to that used with her own staff, to help the volunteers to reach the decisions she wants them to reach:
Somehow you have to get the volunteers to think that it was their idea in the beginning in order for them to implement it the way you want it implemented. And that’s a really, really difficult thing to do but when it happens, it’s wonderful. You just sit back and laugh because they’ve got...all this energy and they’re generating this great idea, but really it was your idea, but they’ve gotten to the point where they believe that they came up with the thought, (second interview)
Similarly, Carrie must orchestrate or facilitate the involvement of top administrators in certain projects. This requires some knowledge of how that individual operates or approaches various situations. Carrie had this to say about how she works with the president on projects such as solicitation letters: 159
[H]is mood might be that he’s just so pumped up about the fact that we’re going to have 50 more students enrolled for this coming fall, that he just thinks that that is the best news in the world and we have to share it with everybody. Well, you might have already prepared a letter that talks about the [overseas] project, and you’ve got to either catch him at a time where he’s willing to let you do what you need to do, or you need to be flexible for that, (second interview)
Once again, Carrie must anticipate someone else’s moods or actions and try to approach that person in such a way as to obtain his or her approval for the idea or project that she has already designed. In the situation described above, Carrie’s first choice is to be able to proceed with the solicitation letter that she has already written. If she cannot "catch" the president at the appropriate time and in the appropriate mood, however, she must be willing to be "flexible" and re-do the letter according to his wishes.
During his second interview, Jay described how he planned to work with faculty members regarding classroom assessment. His comments seemed to imply that he would use a "legitimating" strategy in the form of a text written by an outside expert in this field. Jay planned to use the text and other articles on assessment during the fall faculty retreat. In addition, he hoped to bring a leading researcher in the assessment field to campus to speak with faculty, after the retreat.
This particular strategy will be discussed in greater detail in the next chapter.
Scott appears to rely on networking among various groups on campus as a means of accomplishing his objectives or obtaining decisions favorable to his area.
For example, he tries to foster good relationships with faculty members by involving 160 them in residence hall programming and keeping them informed about student life.
In return, he hopes that faculty will vote favorably on issues or concerns relating to his area. He related a story in which this strategy seems to have been successful, and noted that his relationship with one of the committee members was helpful in obtaining new lighting for one of the residence halls:
...I had good contact with [this faculty member]. So when that came up, and it was a student services issue, he was better disposed. I mean, if [he] thought I was a jerk and didn’t know who we were, they might’ve gotten upset anyway, because of the urgency of this particular situation, but if it had been another type of decision, and [he] was sitting there, it would have been better for me having known him and having him know me and what we do. So that’s why you cultivate those kinds of things....You don’t have to be quite as, it’s not really political, it’s just that, like I said, if something’s coming up in a given committee that you think would be helpful if so-and-so had a good disposition towards you, you do that, (second interview)
Interestingly, this was the part of his profile with which Scott took exception; he thought that the description of his networking activities sounded "Machiavellian."
He addressed this concern, and attempted to clarify the researcher’s impressions, during his final interview:
Well, it sounded to me like there was a lot of intriguing going on, and it really isn’t that. It’s more, I guess, networking than intriguing. Than anything. It’s not using one office against another office, or trying to figure out how to end run offices or anything, but just really getting to know all the offices, how they work, what they do, who complements who, and going to the right person at the right time and getting the help when you need it. (third interview)
Scott further explained that this is the reason he encourages his staff to learn as much as possible about other offices on campus. He believes that, at a school such 161
as Midwestern, it is vital to understand and be aware of the activities of other
departments and offices, as he may need to call on these offices to assist him with
programs for students. Scott illustrated this concept in his comments about another
office with which he interacts frequently:
He may not have any idea how we work in the residence halls. Doesn’t need to know, to do his job. But I need to know how he does his job, because I have to do the referrals, I have to invite him in for the programs. I [may] have to do the programs....So it’s more important for me to know how they work. So I have to, if I’m going to do the job. I have to be able to network, (third inteview)
In addition, as staff members become more knowledgeable about the activities and responsibilities of other offices on campus, they are able to form more realistic expectations of how those offices will work with the Student Life area. This, in turn, makes Scott’s job somewhat easier to handle. As Scott pointed out,
If you try to get realistic expectations out of.. .your staff, of what these other offices can do, it makes it easier to work with them because then you don’t put yourself in an adversarial relationship with that place. I’m not calling Physical Plant every day complaining and whining about "Why isn’t this done? Why isn’t that done?" Well, I know that they’ve got their own problems, and I know what they’re trying to deal with, and I try and work with them as best I can. (third interview)
Thus, through networking Scott can work better with other groups on campus,
which ultimately benefits his office.
Direct external strategic knowledge. The strategy that described the vast
majority of direct external strategic knowledge involved networking with other
offices or individuals. As mentioned previously, Scott appeared to have been the
middle manager most likely to deliberately involve other individuals and offices in 162
his activities in order to achieve desired goals. What was somewhat unusual about
Scott was his apparent willingness to take a long-term approach to accomplishing
his goals:
You’ve got to make the effort of knowing how important those other areas are, because once those faculty are in the residence halls and see good things going on, have good interactions in the residence halls, see that the facilities are taken care of....Next time they’re in a faculty committee, and someone’s asking them about some sort of bill or some appropriation or something for student services, they’re going to be a lot more predisposed to say "yes" than if you do nothing. So student services have to salesmen in a lot of ways. They’ve got to make sure that the rest of the institution knows about our area, (second interview)
Scott then enumerated several instances in which this strategy had been successful, most notably when he recently requested appropriations for emergency lighting in one of the larger residence halls. He felt that his attention to and inclusion of faculty over the years had helped to lay the groundwork for obtaining the necessary funds:
[W]hat tipped the scale was that faculty got involved. Once the faculty committee got involved, bang, we had emergency lighting....That’s why you cultivate the faculty contacts....You just want to make sure that our facet is ...in front of their vision as much as we can make it. So, if they do...have to make a decision between students and something else, that we make sure that they’re aware of that other facet that needs to be considered. And generally they do. (second interview)
Networking also influences the contacts that a middle manager will develop and use when he or she needs to obtain information. For example, when Scott needs information for a report, he can identify the individuals in other offices who are most likely to have that information. In fact, given the organizational structure 163 of Midwestern, this is the most efficient means of obtaining information. As Scott noted,
...[I]n a smaller institution, you don’t identify offices, you identify people you can ask... .Because a lot of times around here, a person is several offices, because of the fact that sometimes people wear more than one hat. (second interview)
In addition, the number of "one-person offices" at Midwestern means that middle mangers and other staff members must be able and willing to approach almost anyone on campus; in order to operate effectively, no one can afford to upset or refuse to work with another person.
As mentioned in a previous section, Joyce also utilizes a networking strategy in order to obtain information and data from other offices on campus. Her network consists of other individuals who, like herself, depend on computers and computer generated information to do their jobs.
Information and information control play a role in determining what kinds of reports Joyce will produce, as well. As shown in her profile, Joyce has found it necessary on several occasions to provide information that was different than what had been requested. In some instances, she must also choose whether to provide the information at all:
I mean, the choices are you don’t share it, you put it in, in a format that they can comprehend and won’t be dangerous, or, you spend the time educating them as to what it means, (second interview) 164
Particularly in terms of enrollment, that’s something that’s newsworthy and you have to be careful about how you explain what your enrollments are, particularly if an area is down, and what that means...without taking it out of context, (second interview)
These comments seem to illustrate that, while Joyce is not responsible for developing or maintaining or the university’s image, she nevertheless makes many choices as a result of her concern over how Multi-Purpose Midwestern University is presented, either on campus or within the larger community.
Another theme in strategic directory knowledge was that of being a salesperson for one’s office. While this is a strategy that appears fairly often within the scope of recipe knowledge, as will be seen in the next chapter, Scott also made several comments that indicates this is a useful strategy in accomplishing one’s job responsibilities.
So you’ve just got to have that perspective that, where we know that what we do is important, but it isn’t more important than a lot of other areas of the institution. And you have to go out there and sell your program. It’s not just [so] innately wonderful that everyone’s going to accept it. You’ve got to convince them that it’s wonderful, (second interview)
Again, Scott’s networking and awareness of other offices on campus helps him to understand how to "sell" the programs and activities of his own office. He does not assume that others on campus will view his area’s programs and needs in the same way that he does. Instead, he actively tries to inform others on campus as to what his office does for the institution, and what resources are needed in order to keep performing those tasks. 165
Another strategy seen in the context of direct, external directory knowledge was that of defense or avoiding blame. Carrie, again, seemed to employ this strategy fairly often. She will call on the statewide network of development professionals for assistance in substantiating fund-raising trends, and then prepare reports or memoranda to document her findings.
Carrie also used a defensive strategy in preparing for a change in supervisors.
During the first part of this study, Multi-Purpose Midwestern University was searching for a new vice-president for the development area. Ernest had been filling that position temporarily, but Carrie did not expect him to be named to the post permanently. As a result, she put a good deal of effort into developing a planning document that she could present to the next vice-president. She seemed to view this planning document as a way to prove her professional abilities to the next supervisor, as indicated in the following comments:
...[T]he new guy comes along and sees that there’s a plan in place, and it’s a good plan, and it’s a well-thought-out plan....So it’s good in the sense that the new vice-president, I’ll be able to hand him a booklet and say, "Well, here are my intentions, thought out, clearly displayed in my planning document. Let’s use this to work from, from here." Rather than him coming in here and saying "What are you going to do?" and I say [affecting a "Valley Girl" accent, and bobbing her head from side to side] "Well, I’ll send a letter, and then I’m going to call some people." (second interview)
Several of Carrie’s comments throughout the interviews indicated her desire to be seen as a competent professional. By developing a planning document and being 166 prepared to present it to a new boss, she felt she would be able to establish such an image.
Summary
The two dimensions (internal and external; indirect and direct) within directory knowledge were very helpful in conceptualizing and organizing the information processing activities and strategies of middle managers at Midwestern.
The different activities and knowledge revealed when middle managers deal with people within their office, as opposed to those outside the office, were highlighted and illustrated by employing these dimensions.
Information processing
As Table 2 indicated, middle managers working with individuals internal to their own office seem to make "information processing choices." Middle managers are aware that they must decide which information to pass on to others, and which information to retain or restrict.
Middle managers need to learn the boss’s priorities in order to know which information must be channeled to that individual. This is similar to Gabarro and
Kotler’s (1980) position that subordinates must learn their bosses’ information preferences in order to "manage upward" and maintain an effective working relationship. 167
When dealing with individuals external to their office, middle managers report that they make information processing choices in some cases but not in others. Table 2 shows that, when a direct approach is used, information processing activities are included in the middle managers’ directory knowledge. However, when indirect approaches are used middle managers do not appear to consider information processing knowledge an important component of directory knowledge.
Rather, it seems that obtaining assistance from other offices or gaining approval from a variety of decision makers is considered more useful.
Relationship knowledge
All four middle managers discussed directory knowledge in terms of the relationships they had with people working in the same office, although Joyce and
Carrie appeared to focus on this aspect of relationship knowledge more than did
Scott or Jay.
Jay and Scott seemed to have more concerns regarding boundary issues with individuals in other offices. Carrie did not specifically address boundary issues, but did note that she senses a division or friction between faculty and administrators.
In fact, relationships between faculty and administrators were mentioned by three of the four middle managers. Carrie and Jay noted a sense of "nervousness" between faculty and staff, whereas Scott felt there were no problems between these two groups. Joyce did not express any thoughts on this issue at all; rather, she 168 concentrated her remarks regarding external relationships on those individuals in other offices with whom she networks in order to obtain information.
Finally, Joyce and Carrie spoke of their relationships with peers at other institutions. These peers have been a source of personal and professional support for both Carrie and Joyce. Jay and Scott, on the other hand, made no mention of any sort of external support group or peer relationship with individuals at other institutions.
Strategic knowledge
Table 4 showed the themes in strategic knowledge as these related to directory knowledge. That table, showing both the strategies and the middle managers employing each strategy, appears as Table 5. Table 5. Directory Knowledge Strategies by Middle Manager
FOCUS INDIRECTDIRECT
Internal Facilitate/Orchestrate Defensive Carrie Carrie Pragmatic/Effective Information Control Scott Joyce
External Legitimate Jay Salesperson Scott
Facilitate/Orchestrate Defensive Carrie Carrie Networking Scott Networking Scott & Joyce
In reviewing this table and the strategies used by individual middle managers, it is possible to see patterns in the strategies used by each middle manager.
Carrie’s primary method of involving others on an indirect basis is facilitation or orchestration. She appears to prefer to create an atmosphere that enables others to develop plans or outline processes.
Joyce’s strategies revolve around information. In the indirect approach,
Joyce supplies information to others but does not provide interpretations of that data.
She may choose to include or exclude information on the basis of what she feels is important. Likewise, Joyce’s networking strategies revolve around data and information. She chooses her network based on the individual’s access to 170 information. If someone can access a database or otherwise produce "valid" information, Joyce is likely to include that person in her campus network.
Jay appears to use only one strategy related to directory knowledge. His primary means of dealing with people outside of his office occurs on an indirect basis and involves the use of legitimization. When attempting to convince others of the value of classroom assessment, Jay uses literature, seminars, and the works of outside experts in the field to bolster his arguments. He may also point to the regional accrediting body’s report as evidence of the need for campus-wide assessment.
Finally, Scott appears to use the widest variety of strategies related to directory knowledge. When dealing with people or offices external to his own,
Scott depends on networks to help him accomplish his job duties. He regularly involves faculty and other administrators in committees or activities related to his area, although he does not necessarily direct their efforts in these situations. Rather, he appears to seek support and increased awareness in general; he relies on the positive experiences and attitudes that others have regarding his area to help him obtain the resources or changes that he feels are necessary.
In addition, Scott will occasionally act as a "salesperson" for his particular division. This may occur when Scott is placed in a position of convincing or persuading others that his position is correct on a given topic. He tries to be aware of the values or assumptions on which other groups will base a decision, and then 171 provides information that supports or complements those values and assumptions.
Like any good salesperson, Scott tries to anticipate objections and develop arguments or reasons why his proposals or positions will work for all involved. His networking activities appear to help him in this strategy, as he has become very familiar with the inner workings of other offices on campus through the years. CHAPTER VIII
RECIPE KNOWLEDGE
Recipe knowledge refers to the normative knowledge of organizational
members concerning what should or should not happen (Sackmann, 1991, 1992).
Sackmann (1991,1992) believed that recipe knowledge was an important component
of cultural knowledge, though she found little that could be considered recipe
knowledge among her participants. In this study, however, recipe knowledge
formed the second-largest category of responses (see Appendix C). Recipe
knowledge statements were evident in all but one of the sixteen interviews conducted with middle managers.
Recipe and dictionary knowledge did not appear to overlap; there were no
instances of an interview segment being classified as both dictionary and recipe knowledge. On the other hand, recipe knowledge often overlapped with directory,
axiomatic, and axiom-own knowledge. Thus, middle managers often discussed what should happen while describing how a certain task or responsibility was
accomplished. Similarly, middle managers discussed what should happen in terms of why that was the appropriate action, either from an institutional (axiomatic) perspective, or from a personal (axiom-own) point of view. The latter category,
172 173 and instances of recipe and axiom-own knowledge, will be discussed in a separate chapter.
The recipe knowledge apparent in this study seemed to fall along one dimension: it became apparent that many of the recipe segments contained either implied or explicit recipe statements. Implied recipes are those wherein the interviewee never directly states his or her reasoning, but instead implies his or her feelings as to what should happen, often by omission. Statements of implied recipe knowledge require the listener to interpret the speaker’s meaning, while explicit recipes clearly state the speaker’s intent. Explicit recipe statements do not require the listener to attempt to discern the speaker’s meaning, as the intent or belief is stated directly.
Within both the implied and explicit recipe statements there were some themes, as indicated in the following table.
Table 6. Themes in Recipe Knowledge
IMPLIEDEXPLICIT
Legitimation Legitimation Pragmatic/Efficient Pragmatic/Efficient Boundaries Neglect Salesperson 174
However, as opposed to other cultural knowledge categories, recipe
knowledge seemed to contain more examples of what might be considered "pure"
recipe knowledge. In other words, there were many instances where recipe
knowledge, of either an implied or explicit nature, stood alone and could not be
further categorized as expressing a particular theme.
Implied Knowledge
All of the middle managers in this study used implied recipe knowledge, although Jay and Carrie made many more of these types of statements than did
Joyce or Scott. The tendency was for the speaker to make a statement and leave the
implication or interpretation to the listener, as in these examples from Jay’s interviews:
[W]e feel once the department looks at their own rationale...that they’ll be then able to move from that then into coming up with the objectives, and then eventually begin thinking about "OK, if these are the objectives for our department, then how do the courses that are offered match that?" (Jay, second interview)
[A]nd our hope is that the president will appoint a group to...work on this over the summer, and then that maybe something in the fall can be presented, acted on in time so that by, let’s say, next summer, we can actually get the process under way. (Jay, second interview)
I know that people are beginning to question a little bit about how advising takes place here at the university. Maybe we need to take a look at that. (Jay, third interview) 175
[T]his faculty is afraid of data, or is simply afraid of what it’s going to see, you know, what it’s going to see in itself. Rather than looking at this information and saying, "Well, here’s a little bit more that tells us something." (Jay, third interview)
In each of the statements above, Jay never directly stated what he believed should happen. Rather, he hinted at his beliefs. One must truly listen to Jay to know~or at least seem to know—what actions he feels Midwestern ought to take.
By examining and re-examining Jay’s statements, it becomes clear that he feels the individual departments and faculty should embrace classroom assessment, and should use assessment techniques to scrutinize their departmental and course objectives. Jay does not think that this will happen anytime in the near future, but he hopes that the process can be started within a year. He foresees some resistance from faculty because they do not want to be told of their shortcomings; he implies that the faculty should view reports or information as an opportunity for learning how to address problems and make necessary changes. However, he also seems to realize that this is not how the faculty at Midwestern are likely to view assessment reports.
Carrie’s perceptions and recipe knowledge regarding her position appeared to be affected by the emphasis on the major fund raising campaign that Midwestern conducted during this study. She recognized that the capital campaign was draining contributions from the Annual Fund operations, but had difficulty convincing other staff members that this was truly a problem. Carrie would like to change the focus and structure of the Annual Fund, but has so far not been successful in these efforts. 176
She would like to see Midwestern utilize an annual fund strategy that is used by another institution in the Midwest. By describing how this program is run, Carrie infers that her own program is less efficient:
There’s one particular program that I’d like to model mine after. I met this [director at a conference], he has an Annual Fund program that he has more control over how everybody is solicited. And that’s because it came from the top down, that he is the Annual Fund director, he’s responsible for everybody’s Annual Fund gift, and if you say that he cannot ask for an Annual Fund gift from that person, then you are responsible for it. That’s a program that’s been very effective....I’m up against, "Yeah, that’s really nice, the Annual Fund’s great, but I’m too busy doing my own thing trying to run a campaign, and if it means that he used to give a thousand dollars to the Annual Fund but now I got him to give ten thousand dollars to the campaign, I don’t care that the thousand dollars dropped from your Annual Fund." (third interview)
Having defined a strong program, Carrie is able to show where hers is lacking in comparison.
As indicated previously, Scott maintains a very broad perspective on the operation and environment of Multi-Purpose Midwestern University. His concern over the image of the institution is implied by his comments regarding the marketing of the university to prospective students: "[W]hen you start selling this big "family" thing to everybody so intensively, you can get into problems." Scott seems to be implying that the university would do better to create what he considers to be a more realistic image of itself, rather than trying to create or promote an image that he feels is inaccurate. Ill
Joyce made implied recipe statements regarding the provision of data and information to others, both within and outside of the university. Joyce, in her second interview, stated on two occasions that she occasionally has strong feelings about what information should be provided in order for others to make a decision.
If the person requesting data from Joyce does not ask for the information she thinks they need, she will find a way to include it. She may approach the subject directly by asking them "Is this what you need, or do you really want.. .would this be helpful to you?" When she has a perception "of how something should be done that...was contrary to what was being asked to be done, then I would provide the information saying..."No, I think it should be done this way.""
If she is providing information for her boss, she may "also either provide additional information or present it in a different way that would then cause him to look at it...from a different perspective." Joyce clearly recognizes the impact that her perspective has on the information she provides, as well as the format or style
in which it is provided. She apparently has some notion of what decision or at least what process should be followed, which affects the information she chooses to distribute to those who ask. By the same token, she limits her role to providing or to changing the format of the information. What someone else does with the
information is a matter of individual choice; Joyce does not provide the
interpretation. 178
This is illustrated further by Joyce’s comments regarding enrollment data.
She is conscious that this kind of information can be misinterpreted or misconstrued.
Thus, she must find a way to provide the data while at the same time being "careful about how you explain what your enrollments are, particularly if an area is down, and what that means, without taking it out of context." Joyce understands what information is important, and how the institution should present itself in terms of enrollment figures. She uses this recipe knowledge to determine how and what information will be released to others.
Themes in Implied Recipe Knowledge
Legitimation. For the most part, implied recipe knowledge contained only three themes, and these were limited to specific middle managers. Jay, for instance, indicated a legitimating strategy in some of his implied recipe statements. He said that he hoped to bring a nationally-recognized expert to the campus to speak with faculty regarding classroom assessment issues. By introducing faculty to assessment concepts at the annual Faculty Retreat, and following up with a presentation by a well-known researcher, Jay feels he should be able to help faculty "get the ball rolling" in terms of their involvement in assessment. As indicated in many of Jay’s previous statements, he clearly thinks that the university and its faculty ought to be more involved in and committed to assessment. This belief, and his familiarity with 179
the Midwestern faculty, have combined to help him develop a strategy for
implementing his convictions.
Similarly, Jay believes it would be helpful to have an external consultant
come to campus to help with the university’s Total Quality Management (TQM)
plans. He knows that a top administrator is considering such a move, and feels that
a consultant would help, "so that we get everyone involved in what’s going on at
the university." Notice, however, that Jay does not specifically state that everyone should be involved in "what’s going on." Rather, this is implied from his statement.
Scott is another middle manager who has utilized the professional literature
to legitimate his position. When the university’s decision makers were debating
whether to allow one residence hall to become co-educational, they asked Scott for
information on co-ed housing at other universities. Scott provided the decision
makers with a report that outlined the advantages and disadvantages of co educational residence halls:
I dug through the literature....Was an interesting point on that literature...because the literature part of my report was very brief. Because people asked me, "Well, what’s the literature saying about co ed housing?" I said, "Well, after about 1969, when it was no longer an issue, no one was saying anything about co-ed housing because it’s been accepted for about 20 years"....So there’s really very little recent literature....[Everything I came up with was really dated....And that made a point, because people said, "Oh, it’s really that old hat, huh?" Yeah, it’s that old hat. It’s been done. It’s been proven, (second interview)
From his experience in student life at Midwestern and at other institutions, Scott was already aware that co-educational residence halls were the norm rather than the 180
exception. However, rather than rely on his own experience to convince decision
makers, he graphically showed decision makers that the institution was behind the
times. He brought in axiomatic knowledge as well as external sources to bolster his
arguments. His inclusion of an obviously dated literature survey helped him make
the point that co-ed residence halls are not-and have not been for two decades-an
issue in the student services field. By showing the lack of current literature, he was
able to demonstrate that this was ■"old hat." The subtle implication here is that
Multi-Purpose Midwestern University is behind the times, from a developmental viewpoint.
Pragmatic/efficient. Pragmatism and efficiency appeared again as themes within implied recipe knowledge. Scott noted that it is important for him to stay
informed about events or situations, and to keep George informed as well, because
"You’re just ineffective if you get blind-sided. You can’t handle the problem right."
While he did not state it in so many words, Scott appears to feel that one should be effective and able to deal with any problems that arise; his use of negative terms
("You can’t handle the problem right") makes this an implied rather than an explicit recipe statement.
Scott gave an indication of his strategy for working within an institution such as Midwestern, which seemed to illustrate why he chooses the networking strategy described in the previous chapter. Scott believes that staff members in a position such as his should maintain as broad a perspective as possible in order to function 181
effectively. As he noted, "You can’t get isolated in your own little area and expect
to survive." Those individuals who cannot maintain this sort of perspective
generally leave the institution, and may even leave higher education administration
altogether, according to Scott. Thus, an understanding of the operations of all facets
within the institution, and the involvement of others in the operation of one’s own
particular division, is a crucial skill for administrators in higher education
administration. This recipe for success and survival is implied from Scott’s brief
statements on the topic of networking.
Scott also implied the importance of working together as a team when he described the operations of an office outside of his division:
They don’t even know what’s going on five feet away from them. And don’t care....That used to drive me nuts, because then I’d go to that desk and this desk, and I should’ve only had to make one stop and they’d say, "Oh yeah, she handles that and this is what she does with that kind of information." Doesn’t mean they do it [the task], but the awareness of what’s going on around you, you’d think would be important....to do your job effectively, (third interview)
Joyce believes that efficiency and effectiveness are important to her work, as well, and made similar implied recipe statements on this theme. She sees that the university is moving toward greater efficiency in its operations, as indicated by her statement that "There still needs to be more [steps] made to really make this place run [efficiently], but definitely some steps are being touched." She did not
say exactly what steps still need to be taken, nor did she directly state that the
institution needs to run more efficiently. However, the implication is that 182
Midwestern has not run efficiently in the past, and that it can and should run more
efficiently in the future.
In addition, Joyce has noticed several changes in the operations of the
admissions office since Frank’s arrival:
I don’t know if we necessarily do things consciously. Frank has created an atmosphere where there’s kind of a professional expectation, and that the matters that we handle within the university...need to be done in a professional manner...And also the attitude is that if one of those offices lags behind or approach things differently, we need to be the leaders in how to handle situations, (third interview)
Joyce and Frank both talked about the importance of efficiency and effectiveness in
their interviews. While Joyce appeared to be speaking about "professionalism" in
this instance, she implied that all the offices of the university need to operate as efficiently as possible in order to serve students and maintain enrollment.
Joyce also discussed her level of involvement with the data provided by her office; she has a vested interest in the type and validity of information supplied to others on campus. The data that flows from her office to others must be correct and
trustworthy. Joyce noted that
[I]f I have to come back and justify what it means, that the vested interest is in the accuracy of the information. It’s a kind of, in a sense, validate what my role is as information provider, that it better be right. (third interview)
Joyce’s perspective of her role and the importance of her office to the rest of the
institution provides the recipe knowledge for her job. At the same time, however,
this is considered an implied recipe; Joyce does not state that she strives to provide 183 accurate information because this is what is important to her personally, but rather because it is important as a means of validating her role within the institution. She implies that she is held accountable for the data, and must act accordingly.
Boundaries. As mentioned with regard to other types of cultural knowledge,
Jay seemed to voice the most concerns regarding boundaries and expectations for his office relative to other offices on campus. This concern appeared in recipe knowledge statements as well:
I think the university at some point is going to have to wrestle with what the functions of the Assessment Center really are. I think once we get assessment moving out in the departments, then I think is probably the appropriate time to sit down and say, "OK, what should we be doing, what shouldn’t we be doing, and then how does this relate [to other offices]?" (second interview)
Jay would like to resolve or clarify the responsibilities of his office, but appears to feel that these decisions should wait until after the other departments on campus become involved in assessment. Thus, it appears that Jay believes it may be too soon to specify what the Assessment Center should be doing, since it is not yet clear what role, if any, other offices on campus will play in assessment.
Jay seems to be similarly concerned about the role of his office relative to the Registrar’s office. He noted that many individuals on campus approach the registrar and ask for information; the registrar then contacts Jay regarding the information request. 184
[S]he’ll call me and say, "Jay, I’ve got this, is this something you should do?" What she’s thinking is "I really want to get all of this out of my office and get it over here [to the Assessment Center]." And I just don’t know, I really don’t know how much of it is really her responsibility and how much of it is mine... .So it is very awkward, and I’ve talked to [the Provost] about it, and he knows it’s awkward, but like myself he doesn’t know really what to do about it. (second interview)
Jay’s hesitancy seems to stem from an uncertainty as to how best to resolve this situation. It is a situation that Jay believes should be resolved, however, as evidenced by his statement that he has spoken with the Provost. As with other statements of this type, Jay has not specifically stated what should happen; rather, he implies that a change of some type is necessary. It will be up to others to decide what changes will occur, and how they will be implemented.
Implied Knowledge and Other Forms of Cultural Knowledge
Implied recipe knowledge and directory knowledge. In discussing how she evaluates herself, and how she sees others evaluating her job performance, Joyce revealed recipe knowledge that impacts on her relationships with other staff members. The comments below may at first seem to focus on how Joyce and other staff members evaluate; closer examination shows that this is recipe knowledge regarding evaluation of staff members in general. Joyce initially noted that Frank’s opinions of her performance were the most important in determining what kind of job she has done. She amplified this comment with the following statements: 185
I mean, he’s in charge. He runs the show. And not that I, there aren’t times when I disagree with, I mean, we definitely have our disagreements, but if he says something, it’s the law. [pause] My own opinions matter, [pause] I very seriously consider the opinions of the people who are actually doing the work... .and then, within the network of an office...you tend to value the opinions of the people who kind of have proved themselves, that their opinions...carry more weight than those of the people who perhaps have not carried their weight or proved themselves, (third interview)
In this statement, Joyce is demonstrating her understanding of her role in
relationship to Frank’s role: he is the boss and has proved himself. Staff members
may not always agree with Frank, but his decisions should be considered final. By
the same token, Joyce sees staff members who have "proved themselves" as people
whose opinions should be valued; if someone has not proved himself or herself,
their opinions should not count as much. Thus, one should listen to individuals
whose experience and actions demonstrate their ability to handle the job at hand.
Joyce uses this recipe knowledge to determine which staff members she will include
in her network, and to evaluate the usefulness of their comments or suggestions.
Implied recipe knowledge and axiomatic knowledge. Implied recipe
knowledge was combined with other cultural knowledge categories on several
occasions. Axiomatic knowledge regarding the institution’s environment and values
appeared in statements by Scott and Carrie. Scott discussed the decision-making process at Midwestern and made the following observations: 186
Sometimes, I think people tend to make meetings more involved than they need to be....And when you have this big meeting, which of course takes three times longer to organize because you have to coordinate more schedules, when you finally do have that meeting, half of them sit there like bumps on a log, wondering what they’re doing there... .So sometimes I think meetings get made more complicated than they need to be. Some of it, I think, is pro forma. I think they do it because "This is the way we make decisions," so they’re consensus decisions....There’s a lot of consensus-building, I think, that goes on, so there’s a lot of people that are involved, [but] they’re only peripherally involved, so sometimes decisions take longer, (second interview)
Institutional beliefs about the importance of consensus-building thus appear to affect the process by which decisions are made. Implied within this statement, however, is Scott’s belief that the decision-making process is inefficient and unnecessarily time-consuming. The administrative structure and institutional environment of the university requires the inclusion of many offices and individuals in decisions that have little or no relevance to their particular area. Again, although this was not specifically stated, Scott seems to believe that decisions should involve fewer people and take less time. In addition, only those areas directly affected by a particular decision should be included in the decision making process.
Scott is also concerned about the future direction of the institution. He does not see much discussion taking place about where Midwestern is headed, although he seems to feel that this discussion should be occurring: 187
It’s rapidly becoming to the point that we are not an undergraduate institution anymore. I don’t know what kind of conscious decision is being made there, but we keep marketing it like we are, but we’re not. I think at some point we have to come to the reality of what Midwestern really is, and it’s not a small private college. It is a multi faceted university, that has a small-not small, but I think has a part of it that is an undergraduate institution. And I don’t hear a lot of discussion about that as to where we’re going, (third interview)
Scott thus appears to see a discrepancy between how the institution functions and how it chooses to present itself to the outside. He feels that some effort should be put into determining Midwestem’s future in light of the changing nature of the institution.
The inherent nature of the institution and the attitudes of those who work there also seem to hamper Carrie’s fund-raising activities. Midwestern has not aggressively pursued large contributions, which Carrie feels is a mistake. However, she realizes the mind set of those who hesitate to ask for large donations:
The culture at Midwestern is a wonderful environment to learn and work in, but it also can be something that creates...challenges....That Midwestern family is really there, you know...after a while it sounds like such a corny slogan, but it really is there....It tends to be a very warm, caring environment....But also in that, particularly I was referring to the fund raising aspect, we haven’t challenged ourselves. In other words, we’re so afraid, we can be, so afraid to challenge somebody to make a big gift. "Oh, he can’t do that. Oh, you know, he’s got six kids, we don’t want to embarrass him." Even though we know that he has the capability of giving a lot of money....Bottom line is the challenge, the expectation of being able to, I guess, challenge each other versus the expectation of "whatever you can give me would be fine." And I guess that’s where that warm, caring, don’t-push- anybody environment can work against you. (first interview) 188
Carrie has worked in professional fund raising elsewhere, and did not attend
Midwestern for her undergraduate education; she is therefore something of an outsider, who can look at Midwestern from a more objective stance. She sees an institution that needs to raise funds, but is afraid to challenge alumni or other donors for fear of offending them. Thus, the culture of the institution interferes with the ability to raise funds and assist with operating expenses. Carrie noted that other development professionals within the institution were adopting a more aggressive approach, but that there is great resistance from alumni and volunteer staff members in the Annual Fund office. Until this resistance can be overcome, Carrie fears that many large contribution opportunities will be lost.
Explicit Recipe Knowledge
Where implied recipe knowledge requires that the listener or audience carefully examine statements in order to discern the speaker’s intent, explicit recipe knowledge clearly and directly presents the speaker’s norms. This can be illustrated with examples from each of the four middle managers.
[I]t’s essential that you get that kind of support from your vice- president, that he believes in that type of program, and gives the Annual Fund director the power to do something about it. (Carrie, third interview)
I think we’ve come a long way, though the frustration has been that it’s been the Assessment Center moving and not the university moving, and that’s got to change, it’s now got to be the university moving. It just can’t be, "Well, we’ve got an Assessment Center so we’ll let them worry about it." (Jay, first interview) 189
You can’t say that...you just can’t deal with that office...because you have to deal with that office, whatever it might be. Maybe an example might be [a one-person office]. Maybe you think [that individual] is uncooperative. You don’t want to deal with him. OK, that’s fine. But that means that you’re never going to get any cooperation out of him and he is the...center. So, [tick] him off, you’re out of luck for anything you ever want out of [that center]. So you can’t do that. (Scott, second interview)
I talked a lot about this is information that is one year’s worth of data, and that you cannot, I mean, you may make some modification to what you’re doing, but you can’t completely change what you’re doing based on one year’s and one class’s worth of information. (Joyce, second interview)
These examples illustrate a basic difference between what I have termed implied and explicit recipe knowledge: the former requires the listener to go beyond the words used to describe the knowledge to ascertain the speaker’s recommendations, while the latter is more direct and explicit. It does not require a great deal of effort on the listener’s part to understand or interpret explicit recipe knowledge.
Recipe knowledge can derive from many sources. Jay has apparently gleaned some of his explicit recipe knowledge from external sources. As he attempts to make classroom assessment a fundamental part of the university, he relies on recipes developed by experts and those outside of the institution. 190
I was...at an assessment conference, and I keep hearing over and over again that your top leadership has got to be committed to the process, to the thought, if it’s going to succeed....All the literature, all the research says that, for assessment at an institution to be successful, it has to begin at the faculty level, (third interview)
This explicit recipe knowledge, based on expert advice and research, gives Jay an ally in his assessment efforts; he can point to the literature or research being conducted on classroom assessment issues and use that information to reinforce his position with faculty and administration. Jay also refers to the accreditation report of the regional accrediting association when he discusses the need for faculty involvement in and ownership of assessment. Thus, Jay’s recipe knowledge is not just based on his opinions, but is legitimated by expert research and an external agency as well.
Jay’s explicit recipe knowledge appears to have formed the basis for some of his actions. As a result of his attendance at various seminars and his review of assessment literature, Jay believes it is important for other faculty and administrators to attend conferences or workshops in order to gain a greater appreciation for assessment issues and techniques. Hence, he has begun to circulate flyers and notices regarding workshops offered by other institutions in the hope of convincing some faculty members to attend. He has made a point of reminding the Provost and other academic administrators of these conferences, and has repeatedly asked them whether faculty will be attending any of the workshops. In Jay’s view, 191
"It’s a good faculty development exercise, and I’d recommend some of our newer, younger faculty."
Explicit recipe knowledge helps Scott to decide which items or information should receive priority in his daily work. This type of knowledge also describes which information he will pass on to his supervisor, and the time frame in which this will occur. As Scott noted,
I’ve gotten a feel for the fact that there’s things that-you just don’t let anything slip, if it’s important... .Wellness types of issues. So those are always important, whenever they come up. And need to be brought to [George’s] attention or handled right away, (third interview)
As noted in the chapter on directory knowledge, parents of Midwestern students often telephone the university’s president directly regarding problems or concerns.
Scott’s recognition of this tendency helps to shape his explicit recipe knowledge, as well.
By the time it gets handed all the way back down to us to handle, then handed all the way back up again, that sometimes we can head it off, let the president know in advance, and then address it, we can avoid that problem. So anything that looks like it’s going to go up [the administrative hierarchy] gets handled...before it comes back down. (third interview)
As a result of this knowledge, Scott makes sure that George is apprised of any situation that may potentially require the president’s involvement and, when possible, he and George try to resolve the issue without the president’s involvement. 192
Carrie also shared several examples of how explicit recipe knowledge translates into job performance. Carrie wants her staff and volunteers to be willing to ask for larger gifts, and to be more assertive in pursuing contributions overall.
In the fund raising area we need to be able to capture the good parts of that [Midwestern environment] and still make it a challenge to them. And you can do that, you can do that nicely...people aren’t offended by asking for too much. You don’t demand money from anybody, you tell them how much you need their help, and tell them how much it would mean to the value of their degree, (first interview)
However, in light of the "warm, caring environment" that Midwestern strives to create, in terms of its public image, it can be very difficult to convince staff and volunteers that this is an appropriate way to request donations.
Carrie has also begun to re-assess her management style as it relates to her style of interacting with other staff members. She is starting to realize that she must be aware of the politics involved in many of her day-to-day activities if she is to be truly effective in her job. At the same time, Carrie recognizes that her gender may play a role in how she interacts with others, and in how they will interpret her speech or behavior.
I can’t be this little cowering wimp in the corner. I’ve got to find a way of being aggressive, yet being sensitive enough, and I think that’s, I think more women come across that than men, because when men are too aggressive it’s okay. Ernest’s come pounding in here and you know, demands whatever he wants, right when he wants it. Not because he’s my boss, but because he’s a big, strong deep-voiced male. You expect him to be like that. Same actions, same tone, same everything from a female walking in here might elicit a different response, even from me....So I feel that it’s an issue, particularly with women, and particularly with aggressive women, (third interview) 193
Through this example, Carrie reveals that she is caught in something of a dilemma; as a development professional, she must be able to solicit funds effectively, and to train others to more aggressively pursue donations. In doing this, however, she runs the risk of alienating staff and volunteers, unless she can find a style of communicating that enables her to be aggressive, but not too aggressive.
Themes in Explicit Recipe Knowledge
As shown in Table 6, there appear to be four themes in explicit recipe knowledge. As in implied recipe knowledge, the first theme relates to attempts to legitimize one’s position on a particular topic. The second theme involves pragmatism or efficiency in operations. The third theme in explicit recipe knowledge relates to the middle managers’ sense that they have been neglected by other areas of the university’s administration, while the fourth theme relates to the need to be a "salesperson" in order to help convince others of the need for certain decisions.
Legitimation. As indicated, Jay relies on outside or nationally-recognized experts to help him inform faculty and staff regarding the need for classroom assessment. In addition, Jay believes that it is important to be able to measure
Midwestern’s progress in classroom assessment and related issues. He noted that higher education in general is being asked to justify or prove its worth 194
in terms of the education provided to students: "Higher education has always enjoyed being placed up on a pedestal, simply because it’s higher learning, therefore it’s fine."
Jay feels that it is not enough for an institution to state that it is providing a quality education to students; the institution should be expected to prove these statements to the public.
We have to be able to say, "Yeah, it’s fine." We have to be able to quantify that in some fashion. That’s what it’s all about. And I think Zach [the president] is now thinking we’ve got to be prepared to defend ourselves, (third interview)
This perception appears to be the driving force behind Jay’s efforts to increase awareness of and institutional commitment to classroom assessment principles.
In addition, Jay sees the development of quantifiable data regarding assessment as fitting in with the development of a long-range plan for the institution.
If you have a long-range plan, then...anything that an office or department does can help validate that long-range plan. You know, if we say that we’re going to generate marketable people...and the placement office comes back with an annual report that says only 30% of our people found jobs in the first year, well, then you’ve got some data that says, "Hey, we say this, and our long-range plan was to assure that by the year 2000 everyone would be marketable....If we had, I think a long-range plan here, then as we generate information, people can say now, "Well, gee whiz, if the Assessment Center data is saying that the entering freshmen are low in this or high in this, you know, we’ve got something that we can measure it against." And [the Provost] has said that, that we are cranking out a lot of information, it’s just not being used, (second interview) 195
Thus, the data produced by the Assessment Center would be used to legitimate the
institution’s long-range plan, and vice versa. This appears to be a way to integrate
the Assessment Center more completely in the overall operations of the university.
Praematism/efficiencv. Joyce and Scott each made many explicit recipe knowledge statements that focused on issues of pragmatism or efficiency. As could be expected, Joyce’s statements often related to measuring the effectiveness or usefulness of particular admissions activities, although she also discussed her reasons for choosing how to handle and process information. For example, Joyce spent a fair amount of time during her first year at Midwestern trying to establish a consistent and accurate data base for use by the admissions office. Over the years, she has developed fairly extensive records of admissions patterns, and has also managed to have other admissions counselors upgrade their reporting practices regarding various activities. As a result, Joyce, Frank, and the counselors now have consistent sources of information for use in decision making, and can obtain accurate information in a relatively short time frame.
Having information is not, in and of itself, the most important factor for
Joyce, however. Rather, she believes that it is more important to understand that
information and be able to use it wisely, especially if someone is a decision maker.
As she noted in her second interview, 196
I think the people who are successful in those roles, where they’re depending on someone else for the information, the success of that person depends on if they know what information is there and what the information means and how it can be used. You know, that the wool isn’t going to be pulled over their eyes, and they can’t be led as much as people who, really, don’t know how the information should be used.
Joyce considers her supervisor to be an excellent consumer of information; he generally knows what information he needs and can interpret it himself. Thus,
Joyce usually provides the information as requested, without attempting to present or include information according to her own personal beliefs as to which information or interpretation is most relevant.
Her concern for providing accurate and consistent information is also illustrated by her reliance on the use of computers and other staff members who are computer-literate. Joyce is occasionally frustrated when information is not available from another office due to the lack of computers or staff who are knowledgeable regarding their use. As she noted, "there are some things where I feel like we’re still in the Dark Ages about the computer." Some offices on campus have only recently acquired computers; Joyce feels that the university should have moved faster in this respect.
While much of the information Joyce handles concerns Midwestern’s admissions activities, she also examines information from other universities. This information can be 197
used as a baseline of comparison or of measure as to the success of what we’re doing or not doing. And so when you look at individual programs, or how...another university would handle something, we use that as a-is it successful for them? You know, how do you measure up in that area? (third interview)
Thus, Joyce may use this information to see where Midwestern’s admissions activities need to be improved, or as a means of assessing the overall effectiveness of Midwestern’s operations relative to other schools.
Scott’s comments were oriented more toward his relationships and connections with others on and off campus, and how these relationships affect his ability to accomplish certain tasks. His interest in networking and learning how other offices work is guided by his belief that he can function more efficiently if he understands the responsibilities and limitations of the various offices on campus.
Scott feels that it is important for him to be able to establish relationships and network with other offices because this will help him to do his job to the best of his ability. He needs to know how information is passed from office to office because
"You’ve got to know where the paper’s gone when it leaves your desk, and you have to know where it came from when it came to you desk to be able to handle that paper effectively." As a result, Scott feels that he knows more about how many offices function than those offices know about his responsibilities.
Neglect. While three of the four middle managers had stated, during the first or second interview, that they had been previously neglected or ignored by upper administration in the past, the recipe knowledge related to this sense of neglect was 198 different. In each case, the middle manager indicated that he or she had been advocating a particular view, or requesting some form of assistance for quite awhile but to no avail. This type of knowledge is illustrated in the following examples:
I kept saying that, through research that I had done with my peers, that the Annual Fund needed to be not only a component of the campaign but the primary component. (Carrie, first interview; emphasis added)
I ’ve been yelling for years about the conditions of roofs.... And was not involved in the decision to actually do [a residence hall] this year. Although I have been saying that these roofs need to be fixed. (Scott, second interview; emphasis added)
Now, for years I have been saying we need emergency lighting in the residence halls....You know, we were saying that it was urgent. (Scott, second interview; emphasis added)
It’s a problem. And, I have said, I ’ve said all along that we need to be located like over in the campus center or someplace other than [this] hall so that we can assume more of a university-wide image. (Jay, first interview; emphasis added)
Each middle manager clearly had a particular action or decision that he or she advocated, based on his or her experience, research, or perception of what needed to be done. Both Scott and Carrie had to repeat himself or herself several times before anyone noticed or took action. For Scott, it was not until an incident occurred in the residence halls that emergency lighting was installed, even though he had requested this equipment for several years. In Carrie’s case, the research she provided, the ending of the capital campaign, and several lengthy discussions with her supervisor finally resolved three years’ worth of neglect regarding her 199 concerns for the Annual Fund. On the other hand, Jay has yet to see his suggestions implemented.
Sales ability. One of the roles that Scott may assume when dealing with other offices or constituencies is that of the salesperson. For example, when Scott provided information about the need for renovating the largest men’s residence hall in order to make it more attractive to students and other groups, he said that he needed to "sell" that decision from several different directions. He determined what information would be most convincing for the various groups involved in the decision, and presented that information in such a way as to address the concerns or needs of those groups.
From a student services perspective, he knew that changing enrollment trends might make it necessary for Midwestern to house women in that particular residence hall. Thus, he discussed the need to rehabilitate the building to make it capable of housing students of either gender. He also stressed that this was a more reasonable arrangement, given his knowledge of student development. On the other hand, he understood that the most important issue for the resource management area was the ability to recoup any funds invested in renovation through increased conference housing. Thus, he made sure that he stressed the advantages of renovating the building from that aspect, as well.
Likewise, Scott attempted to "sell" the vice-president for resource management on the need for emergency lighting for several years, but "we just 200 couldn’t get him to buy that argument." As a result of involving faculty members in residence hall activities over the years, however, Scott was able to build a network of individuals who understood the role and functions of the student life area. Scott noted, "you pick some people, maybe, who will never get into the building and don’t have anything to do with student services, just so you have those contacts out in the faculty area." Over time, these faculty members may begin to speak in favor of projects or activities that are necessary for one’s area, as occurred after an emergency when one of the buildings was evacuated in total darkness.
Faculty members and students demanded that emergency lighting be installed, and it was.
In some respects, Scott could also be viewed as a salesperson with regard to the parents and families of Midwestern students. His focus on providing clean residence halls and friendly staff members at the beginning of the year, when students are moving on campus, is aimed at establishing a good impression in the minds of parents. While students will see Scott and his staff every day throughout the school year, parents have only one or two days to form an impression of the university, its residence halls, and the quality of the staff in general. Thus, Scott realizes that it is imperative that he and his staff make the most positive impression possible. 201
Explicit Recipe Knowledge and Directory Knowledge
The middle managers in this study demonstrated explicit recipe knowledge much more often than implied recipe knowledge, particularly when they were discussing how they interact with others in the institution; this was especially true of their discussions of relationships with staff members or their supervisors.
Scott, for example, explained that he often told George about things that
George might not need to know. This was a statement regarding how Scott works with George. Scott’s comments also indicate that there is recipe knowledge that accompanies directory knowledge, as in the following statement:
I think it really helps in handling whatever that situation is. If you get blind-sided by something, two things happen. You’re going to fumble around with it and it’s going to take you longer to handle it, whatever it is, and secondly, depending on what the situation is....that’s the parent’s impression of Midwestern, not necessarily of me or my office, but of Midwestern. So, if I look stupid, the institution looks stupid....If I don’t look stupid, then the institution doesn’t look stupid. (third interview)
Although Scott seemed to be referring to himself in this example, he was actually discussing why he tries to keep George well-informed; Scott believes that it is important for the institution’s image that staff members be able to deal with any situation that might arise, particularly if parents or people from outside the university are involved. It is important to Scott that the institution not appear inept or unprofessional. This recipe knowledge, then, affects how Scott interacts with other staff members.
O 202
In several instances, these statements followed and expanded upon implied recipe knowledge. For example, when Scott said that staff members cannot afford to become isolated in their own areas, an implied recipe statement, the statement was explained by the following explicit recipe knowledge:
If you can’t perceive that, you don’t belong in higher education....Because you’ll get frustrated real fast, and that’s why a lot of people burn out at the lower levels of higher education administration. They don’t realize that, or refuse to, or decide that their view...is right and get tired of ramming their head into the wall.
Thus, a recipe such as "do not become isolated," which is a fairly general statement, has a very specific basis; this basis-and the consequences of isolation- are clearly articulated by explicit recipe knowledge.
Joyce also demonstrated a personal values component in her explicit recipe knowledge, especially with regard to her own job performance.
I have a certain level of expectations for myself. And I use my standards, as how I feel like, number one, that I would want to be treated or what level of performance I would want to see in someone else. That that would be my--those are the standards that I have. My own. And that comes, obviously, because of past experience. My own personal outlook. That worked for me before, (third interview)
Joyce thus uses her own values system to determine how she should perform in her job, and also what level of performance she should expect from others.
Likewise, an example was given previously wherein Jay stated that the faculty were afraid of data because they might illustrate areas of weakness. In the
interview, he expanded upon this comment by saying that "I think...faculty need to know that it’s okay to find out some things about themselves and how they teach 203 that are contrary to what they think they are doing." This is similar to the explanation given for the previous example, except that that explanation was based on conjecture or interpretation; this statement explicitly defines what Jay meant, and requires no further interpretation on the part of the listener or the reader.
There were also many occasions on which the combination of explicit recipe knowledge and directory knowledge provided by the middle managers did not explicate prior statements. For example, Jay spoke of the organizational and reporting relationship of his office to the upper administration and clearly identified what he felt should have been the proper structure:
[T]he Provost...made a real error in this, in my opinion...[he] felt...he had too many people reporting to him, and so therefore decided that the Assessment Center, because it was located over in [this] Hall would report to Richard. I definitely think that the Assessment Center, because assessment is really a faculty issue, should be reporting to the Provost. I think it needs that kind of backing, that kind of organizational strength, (first interview)
Jay also noted that classroom assessment issues must receive the support and institutional approval of upper administrators, particularly the deans, Provost, and president, in order to be successful. Without that kind of administrative support,
Jay fears that classroom assessment at Midwestern will not survive. As he noted during the second interview, "I think it’s only by...reporting to the Provost that we gain a university-wide recognition."
Carrie’s explicit recipe knowledge also included a discussion of how she perceives her boss working with his staff. She stated that Ernest is very interested 204
in the Myers-Briggs (Myers, 1980) model, and that he feels that the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator (Myers, 1962) is an important tool for understanding and working
with staff members. As a result, Carrie has also become interested in the MBTI
(Myers, 1962) and its use. During the course of this study, she and her staff
completed the MBTI and will use the results to better understand one another.
Carrie expects that this will increase the effectively of interactions between and
among the staff members. As she noted, it is important "that you know which
buttons to push and which ones not to."
Carrie and Jay also discussed their perspectives on the interaction between
members of the faculty and the administration. Both see the relationship between
faculty and staff as being adversarial, and both feel that this is not healthy for the
institution. For Carrie, the adversarial relationship means that faculty and staff
cannot operate as a team; she said that each side needs to understand the problems
and concerns of the other side, so that all can "work better as a team."
Jay, meanwhile, noted that the lack of team work, and the tensions between
faculty and administration, have led to discussion of a new governing body for
Midwestern. The university is considering a council comprised of faculty and
administrators, wherein every full-time faculty member and full-time administrator
would have the opportunity to vote on issues of significance to all. This is
important, according to Jay, "because out of that you can come about with a
program review that is neither academic or administrative, it is a program review 205 process for the university." Jay sees this as a positive step, and in fact has volunteered his office as the first administrative office to go through the review process once it is established.
Summary
Given Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) research findings, it was surprising to find so many instances of recipe knowledge among the middle managers in this study.
Whether they stated their beliefs and desires explicitly or implicitly, the middle managers each clearly had some sort of personal vision or direction that guided their efforts in performing various aspects of their jobs. In addition, the combination of recipe knowledge with either directory or axiomatic knowledge seemed to provide significant guidelines for job performance. These guidelines often related to the use of information or other means of exercising upward influence within the university.
Both Jay and Scott appealed to external authorities to help them legitimize their beliefs. Jay relied on "national experts," published research, and seminars to convince other staff and faculty of the need to pursue classroom assessment. Scott, on the other hand, used out-dated literature to show that the issue of co-educational residence halls was no longer a major concern in the student development or residence life fields. Jay and Scott thus identified information and data sources that they thought would be persuasive for their particular audiences. These middle managers appeared to feel that individuals in decision-making positions would find 206
"expert" information to be more compelling than the opinion of the particular middle manager. Both middle managers also appeared to have a fairly clear idea of how decisions are made at Midwestern, and used this knowledge to help them provide relevant information to their respective decision makers.
Efficiency and practicality also emerged as reasons for some of the choices
Scott and Joyce make regarding specific job duties. Scott feels it is important to share information and keep his supervisor well-informed; by doing this, Scott can avoid being "blind-sided." At the same time, Scott believes it is important for him to know what other offices on campus are doing, and to work effectively as a team with those offices. This will prevent him from becoming isolated in his own area, and will help him to see where his own division fits in with the rest of the university.
Joyce sees the university becoming more professional in its operations overall, and appears to see information and data use as contributing to the level of professionalism of various offices. Her role in providing accurate and reliable
information supports the increasing efficiency and professionalism of her office. By the same token, Joyce will include individuals in her network of contacts based on
their ability to provide what she considers to be accurate and reliable information.
Much of Carrie’s recipe knowledge reflected her continuing evaluation of her
management style with regard to her own office, and also to her interactions with her boss, Ernest. During the course of the study, Carrie appeared to change her 207
perception of her working relationship with her own staff and also with Ernest. As
the study progressed, Carrie indicated that she became more willing to confront
Ernest in order to accomplish certain tasks; rather than wait for him to find time to meet with her on every single issue, she began to seek him out and assert her needs on only the most important items. Carrie seemed to become more comfortable dealing with other issues on her own. Thus, Carrie keeps Ernest informed about her activities, but no longer feels that he must make every decision or approve every action she makes.
Meanwhile, Carrie is involving her own staff more in office decisions, and allowing herself to learn from their experiences. While it is still important that she be in control of the Annual Fund office, Carrie does not seem to feel that she must come up with all of the answers. Instead, she develops a plan or outline of what she believes should happen and then has her staff contribute their thoughts. CHAPTER IX
AXIOMATIC KNOWLEDGE
Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) discussion of axiomatic knowledge indicates that she found this type of knowledge only at the highest levels within the organization.
In contrast, the middle managers in this study made many statements that revealed their knowledge of institutional assumptions and values, as well as the importance of these assumptions and values in their own jobs. While axiomatic knowledge comprised the smallest grouping (see Appendix B), in terms of the overall number of segments that could be coded as "axiomatic," there nevertheless appeared to be more responses of this type than Sackmann (1991, 1992) found in her study.
The table in Appendix B also indicates an interesting aspect of the axiomatic knowledge grouping in this study. It had been assumed that the middle manager who had been with Midwestern the longest would make more comments indicating axiomatic knowledge than would an individual who had been with the university for a relatively short time. In contrast, Jay, who had been at Midwestern the longest, had markedly fewer axiomatic knowledge statements than did the other middle managers in this study. Although Jay has been at Midwestern far longer than either
Scott, Joyce, or Carrie, he made a total of four statements that could be categorized
208 209 as being axiomatic. Carrie, on the other hand, has only been at Midwestern for four years, yet she spoke about the "Midwestern culture," which was a phrase that
Jay never used.
In reviewing "axiomatic", I found that many of the segments that had been coded as belonging to this category were related to institutional-level assumptions.
Each segment was then examined to see the aspect of axiomatic knowledge to which it seemed to pertain. Most of these institutional axioms seemed to be related to the mission of the institution, as reflected by comments regarding the religious foundation of the university. Participants also talked about the decision making process and the "good of the institution" generally, as well as the "ideal of Multi-
Purpose Midwestern University." The various themes that comprised axiomatic knowledge will be discussed individually.
Institutional Image and Culture
Although the word "culture" was not used in any of the interview questions, middle managers occasionally referred to the "Midwestern culture" in their responses. For the most part, the middle managers referred to the Midwestern culture in terms of the "family" metaphor mentioned in the institutional profile.
Their perspectives on the image Midwestern portrays, both to those within and outside of the institution, indicated a belief in the friendly, caring, "family" environment projected in various publications. 210
The culture at Midwestern is a wonderful environment to learn and work in....that Midwestern family is really there, just after awhile it sounds like such a corny slogan, but it really is there. I’ve been through a lot of changes in my own life since I’ve been here and have felt the support and the caring and the loving from everybody that has been in my division, in the university, that sort of thing. It tends to be just a very warm, caring environment. (Carrie, first interview)
I think the theme that always comes up that describes more the atmosphere rather than the educational mission would be "Family University." In that that seems to be so prevalent in the discussions about the atmosphere on campus, the friendliness on campus. (Joyce, third interview)
Not all of the middle managers agreed with this assessment, however. In fact, Scott gave a fairly lengthy explanation of why the "family" image does not adequately portray Multi-Purpose Midwestern University. He noted that the institution had for many years focused on the teacher/student relationship, or what he called the "old mold of education. Of a faculty member sitting under the tree with the students gathered at his feet, and he knew them all, and it was that kind of relationship." In recent years, however, Scott does not see this type of relationship being stressed on campus. Rather, he feels that
Faculty members...are becoming more and more what American society is. It’s becoming 8-to-5....When they’re not at work, they’re not here. And whereas they might notice something about the students, they’re the ones that are going to call our office and say, "I’ve noticed this weirdness about Sam. Handle it." And then they go home, (third interview)
As a result, Scott feels that "in some degree, that Midwestern family thing has gone by the wayside." In fact, Scott said that 211
When this was really a family institution.. .we weren’t running around talking about the Midwestern family....[I]t almost became like, "Well, we’re not the Midwestern family anymore, so we better really start telling ourselves that we are so we believe, so that we can tell everybody else." (third interview)
Scott also recognized that federal regulations and changes in the laws have affected Midwestern’s ability to treat students like family.
It’s also difficult to sell that [family image] when there’s so many outside regulations. Because finances come into that....I mean, you can’t turn around, [without] another change of regulations. And then we’re not treating you like family. Well, you can’t. There’s so many laws....It’s nice to say I’m going to be your family, I’ll give you a break--I can’t. Because...the federal regulations say I’ve got to do it this way. (third interview)
Scott’s pragmatic attitude causes him to see the fallacy of the family image. At the same time, however, he sees that image being promoted in publications and in the way administrators and faculty talk about Midwestern. Students and parents seem to believe in the family image, and expect Scott and other administrators to be able to deal with them and their concerns "like one of the family."
Scott said that this belief in the family image often results in parents calling the university’s president or other high-ranking administrators directly; those administrators, in turn, often spend a fair amount of time trying to resolve the issue or problem, rather than delegating that task to a more appropriate staff member.
In Scott’s view, this is inefficient because it means that the president or some other senior administrator "is tied up...with something he doesn’t need to handle."
Knowing that this situation may arise, Scott briefs George frequently on any 212 problems that are likely to go directly to the Dean or president. In the meantime,
Scott stated that administrators continue to be "family-like in approach, but it can be frustrating trying to live up to that image."
Jay did not speak of the "family" metaphor when discussing the university, but he did mention what appeared to be a closely-related aspect of the institution’s image. Jay suggested that the pseudonym for the institution should be "Midwestern
University," because of the concentration of students, staff and faculty who are from the Midwest. Much as Midwestern would like to market itself as a regional institution, Jay believes that that is not the case.
I don’t think we’ll ever really be viewed as an institution [of regional significance] unless we change our whole image that is typically [not] appealing to students who are out of state unless their parents are alums or have some sort of tie to the [immediate geographical] area, (third interview)
Jay seems to feel that the institution is inherently "midwestern" in its perspective and in its approach to education. He noted that, of the first-year or sophomore students who did not return to Midwestern in the prior year, the vast majority were from out of state.
Thus, while most of the middle managers had some idea of what the university’s image or essential nature is, these perspectives appear to be in conflict.
It was, however, interesting that Joyce and Carrie, the two middle managers most involved in marketing or presenting the institution to outside constituencies, both view Midwestern largely as the "family" institution it professes to be. On the other 213 hand, Scott and Jay, who do not typically have to market the institution’s image, both seem to feel that the "family" metaphor is inaccurate, and possibly risky, as well.
At the same time, one’s perspective on Midwestern appears to have some bearing on how one approaches their job. For Scott, the "family" image means that parents feel free to call the president or one of the deans directly with any problems; thus, Scott feels it is important to keep his boss informed about any possible problems in order to prevent George from being "blind-sided." Meanwhile, Jay recognizes that Midwestern is just that: a midwestern institution, with limited appeal to students from out-of-state. By the same token, the regional accrediting body, and the public relations image of the institution, both imply that Midwestern should be attracting and educating a wider array of students. Jay’s job, then, is to help
Midwestern assess and develop appropriate educational programs for this audience.
For Carrie and Joyce, the "family" image of Midwestern can be either a blessing or a curse. Carrie understands that it is the "family feeling" of the institution that helps attract volunteers and contributions to the Annual Fund; at the same time, this image may prohibit fund-raisers from aggressively or effectively asking for contributions. Thus, as Carrie noted, "that warm, caring, don’t-push- anybody environment can work against you." While she herself has no problem pursuing donors, Carrie noted that this attitude has angered some of the volunteers 214 and alumni working with the Annual Fund office. She has had only limited success in changing the manner in which volunteers approach donors or regular contributors.
Institutional Mission, Structure, and Decision Processes
Educational Mission
The middle managers in the study generally agreed that the primary mission of Midwestern University is to teach students. Whether the university truly focuses on undergraduate or graduate education was a point of disagreement, however all middle managers noted that teaching and learning are vital to the mission of the institution.
Carrie noted that the institutional mission and environment were different from other universities, particularly those larger than Midwestern. She indicated that both the staff and faculty, as well as the students, tended to be more interested in or dedicated to a sense of community. In keeping somewhat with the family motif, Carrie also noted that everyone at Midwestern has an opportunity to get to know the students personally, which "makes a difference in their...education." As a result of the environment and mission of Midwestern, Carrie felt that students "go on to respect other people, their community, their responsibility, and that kind of thing, because of some of those things, of how they were treated when they were here." As a result, Carrie stated that "[I]t’s just a lot easier to do my job." Given the family atmosphere and the connections to Midwestern that the institution 215 encourages, Carrie finds it is easier to raise funds from alumni and institutional friends.
Jay, too, is concerned about the educational mission of Midwestern, but from a different perspective. Jay would like to be able to demonstrate to faculty, staff, and even to the regional accrediting agency, that Midwestern relies on its stated mission to make decisions regarding programming and other educational issues.
Overall, Jay believes that the testing his office conducts with entering first-year students, sophomores, and seniors shows that the university does live up to the claims of its mission statement. As he noted, "We’ve been able to prove that it’s fact." However, while he feels that the university overall is delivering the kind of education it promises in its mission statement, he is still concerned that individual courses or faculty members may not be quite up to that standard. Thus, he is very concerned that Midwestern implement classroom assessment as quickly as possible.
Institutional Decisions
Faculty influence. As a result of the focus on teaching, Scott believes that faculty involvement and opinion is important in institutional decisions. As he noted,
[T]hey really come more out of that mold of the guy under the tree with the student. I mean, "Look, there’s two major parts of this institution: us [faculty] and the students. And we’re [faculty] unhappy about something." People are going to stand up and take notice....Because while the faculty don’t run the institution, if the faculty as a whole stand up and say "We want this," people will notice. And then they’ll do something about it. (second interview) 216
Thus, in Scott’s experience, there have been several instances wherein actions that he felt were necessary were not taken until faculty members became involved in the issue. According to Scott, once faculty become involved and let the administration know their feelings, the decision is usually made right away.
Decision making process. "Consensus" was a word used often in describing the decision making process at Midwestern. The president himself, in a discussion prior to the start of the study, stated that he saw himself as a consensus-builder.
Whether others on campus share this opinion is not clear.
Scott said that he thought the president viewed himself as a consensus- builder, although he was not sure if this was really the case. At the same time,
Scott recognizes that, while a great deal of rhetoric exists regarding the importance of building a consensus in decision making, in reality
[Everybody knows that...the decisions are really made by three people. A lot of people’s input is asked, a lot of consensus is gained, but the signature on the bottom of the document is one of three people, (second interview)
Scott seemed to view this symbolic emphasis on consensus as part of the reason for inflated attendance at routine meetings. As noted, Scott felt that meetings at
Midwestern tend to be more complicated than necessary, with many people in attendance who have only a marginal connection to the topic under discussion. This appears to be largely proforma, with the attitude that "[W]hen you have consensus decisions, you have to have everybody there." 217
Another reason for involving so many individuals in meetings is the large number of one-person offices on campus. In part, this is due to the large number of programs offered by Midwestern, most of which are overseen by just one or two staff members.
Institutional considerations. Scott noted that many decisions are made with
"the good of the student" in mind. Midwestern University, according to Scott, is very student-oriented. One of the reasons that Scott attends so many meetings, he said, is that many of the issues discussed in those meetings have at least a peripheral impact on student life. As a result, he may be required to attend several meetings in a given week, even though his input is only necessary on a very minute portion of the discussion.
At the same time, Scott noted that beyond a certain level in the decision making, "the good of the student," by which he meant undergraduate students, became subordinate to "the good of the university." These two "goods" may be identical in some instances, but in other instances they are not.
One example of this, according to Scott, was the university’s decision to add another graduate/professional program to the curriculum. While there would be some benefit for current [undergraduate] students, because of the influx of professors in that field, that decision was probably based on the university’s perception of a need in the larger marketplace for additional educational opportunities in that particular field. 218
They saw a perceived need on the outside, the ability of the institution to address the need, and the benefit that would accrue to the university by making that decision....Those kinds of decisions, they’re not going to be aimed at the student, they’re going to be aimed at, more the institution as an institution. (Scott, second interview)
In another situation, Scott utilized his knowledge of Midwestern’s priorities, and its emphasis on fiscal responsibility, to develop arguments in favor of co-ed housing. He used data that showed that damage to residence halls usually decreases when halls become co-ed. In addition, he argued for renovating the largest men’s residence hall to make it more attractive for women; this would help both in housing men and women during the school year, and would also make the building-and, by extension, the university-more attractive for a greater number of summer conferences. Thus, Scott felt that he
sold it from two different directions. Because, as I said, there were two facets of this decision. We could’ve made the greatest programmatic decision in the world, but if I couldn’t have convinced resource management that this was worth the money, we wouldn’t have done it.
Ultimately, the university did alter its residence hall policies to permit more co-ed housing options, and also renovated the men’s residence hall as Scott had suggested.
While he believes that the development issues he raised played a role this decision, Scott also realizes that "the flexibility thing is more important to resource management than anything." Scott understood what facts would be most important to the resource management side in making this decision, and also understood that these concerns would probably take precedence over the developmental issues. As 219 he said, "when you talk about the good of the university, [it] depends on what discussion you’re sitting in on." Thus, he included arguments that would appeal to administrators when presenting his views.
Joyce has also had experience dealing with what is "good for the institution."
While this usually occurs as a result of her efforts to ensure the enrollment of an appropriate class of new students, in at least one instance "the good of the institution" was served by withholding information from other offices on campus.
This situation occurred just after Midwestern had begun a multi-million dollar fund raising campaign, which included, among other things, the need to raise money for improved athletic facilities. In conducting research to determine what students felt was important in choosing a school, Joyce found that athletic and recreational facilities were considered a low priority. As she noted,
There was a very low importance of that, yet this was a major focus of the campaign. And the decision had to be made: do we include this as something that’s a low priority to students in choosing a college? At that particular time, we chose not to put that on the list of something that was a low priority, because of the politics happening around the campus. Now the next year, after the campaign was under way....we did choose to include that, because again, for the second year, it came up as something that was not a high priority for students in choosing a college, (second interview)
Joyce said that the original decision not to include this information was made because she and Frank realized that it would not change how they recruited students.
Joyce outlined the thought process and the questions that she and Frank discussed
in making this decision: 220
How, in the scope of this report, how critical was that for people to make decisions about the recruiting process? How important was that weighed against what the fund raising drive, and where people were pouring all their energies, how important was whatever waves that particular statement could cause, based on what was happening on campus? Was it that important to know that that was a perception at that particular time? Would we have changed our recruiting? Would...did it matter that much to include it versus the damage that it could do? In terms of people thinking that somebody could really grab onto that and make a significant problem because the decision had already been made and publicly announced that that was a focus of the campaign....And in terms of recruitment, well, it may not be that important, but in terms of retention, heck yeah, it’s important. So, why create waves with something that’s already established? (second interview)
In the long run, then, it appeared that Midwestern’s goal of providing improved recreational and athletic facilities could help in retaining students. Thus, given the institution’s focus on these facilities in its capital campaign, and the potential hindrance this information could cause in the fund raising efforts, Joyce initially chose not to mention the relatively small role such facilities play in recruiting new students.
Religion
Given Midwestern’s affiliation with a religious denomination, this research had expected that middle managers would focus on this aspect of the institution when talking about axiomatic knowledge. Instead, the topic received only passing notice from most of the middle managers. The specific denomination was 221 mentioned by three of the four middle managers, while the impact of the religious affiliation on one’s job performance was only mentioned by Scott.
Scott had previously worked at an institution affiliated with a different religious denomination. At that institution the church was not very involved in the operations of the college. Thus, when Scott first came to Midwestern, he did not expect the church affiliation of the school to matter. As he noted, "At that time I did not realize the difference, and there is a significant difference." In contrast to his previous institution, Scott said that Midwestern tends to be
[R]eal hands-on, where a majority of your Board of Directors [are] very church-related, very church-y, if you will....[W]hen I interview people who come here to be residence hall directors, I’ll tell them that this is a church-related school, (first interview)
At the same time, however, Scott noted that the church’s influence on institutional operations had not significantly affected how he performs his job until just a few months prior to the start of this study. Up until that time, the major influence of the church on Scott’s residence hall operations occurred in the policies related to single-sex versus co-ed housing. The church did not permit co-ed residence halls at Midwestern until the early 1990s. In the programming area, however, the church had not exercised much control or oversight. Up until that time, Scott said, "I may have been advised ’when you handle that topic, you should make sure your approach is balanced,’" but he had never been told that he could not offer a particular program. 222
Just prior to the start of this study, however, Scott and his staff had planned to hold a "psychic fair" dealing with various topics and issues related to psychic phenomena. The university pastor told Scott that he could not offer such a program, as it was contrary to the teachings of the church. When Scott tried argue in favor of the fair, he also mentioned that he himself was not in a position to make
"theological judgments." The pastor replied by saying that she would contact the bishop of the denomination, which she did; the bishop also denied the staffs request to hold the fair.
Professional Axiomatic Knowledge
Some of the middle managers discussed knowledge, practices, and procedures that are common to their particular professions within the field of higher education.
Joyce, for example, talked about the field of admissions in general as being quantitatively-oriented. As a result, admissions professionals are often concerned about numbers, ratios, and other objective measures of their efforts. This focus on measurable results means that admissions officers can be held accountable for their actions in ways that many other higher education administrators cannot. As Joyce stated, "You either get the freshmen or you don’t get the freshmen."
If the admissions office does not succeed in attracting and enrolling the desired number of new students, the entire institution is aware of and affected by this fact. Thus, according to Joyce, the admissions office at Midwestern 223
incorporates ways of measuring the success or effectiveness of each of its activities.
As Joyce said, "[T]hat’s kind of the overriding theme of everything that we do, that there has to be a rationale for doing it." Part of Joyce’s job, then, is to examine these measurable characteristics to help determine whether the office is meeting its goals, and whether certain activities should be continued or changed in order for the admissions office to meet its goals.
Joyce further recognizes that the admissions profession, and the office of admission at most universities, is constantly in a state of flux. This is due, Joyce said, to the fact that
[WJe’ve gone from the mode of...gatekeeper to really having to promote the institutions, and in order for a university to stay competitive, they need to continually be assessing what they’re good at and promoting that, and promoting it in a variety of ways that, perhaps, is going to be different than the next 3300 other universities. And so, the flux is by need for survival, (third interview)
At Midwestern, the admissions office is also attempting to provide leadership for other offices on campus that are involved with student services or student enrollment. Joyce believes that this leadership initiative is largely due to Frank’s influence, and has resulted in an attitude, at least among admissions staff members, that
[Wje’re not just recruiting a freshman class... we have the responsibility of bringing students in to a university and that the admission office isn’t the entire university, and that we have to have other offices work together, (third interview) 224
Thus, Joyce said, the admission office at Midwestern attempts to appear as professional as possible, and also tries to assist other offices in providing services and information to students and their parents.
Scott, likewise, appeared to have a strong sense of what his profession, student services, expects in terms of the types of living and learning environments that are appropriate, and the kinds of programs that should be offered to students.
He used his knowledge of these expectations, and of the research that had been done in this field, to make an argument for permitting co-ed residence halls on campus.
In his report to upper administration, Scott noted that
[F]rom a student services point...this is a developmental mode. It’s just more real to live in a co-ed environment...So it’s a development mode, it’s more real, and it fit with what were doing because we have single-sex, freshmen halls, then you would go to a co-ed, upper-class hall, and then, you can also go into a limited self-governing upper-class hall, so there’s kind of a grade of steps, moving on as you go into housing. So it fit programmatically, as well, (second interview)
Thus, when Scott needed to make the point that co-ed housing was a reasonable step for the institution to take, he was able to draw on the knowledge shared by others in his profession to present his case.
Another aspect of Scott’s professional axiomatic knowledge appeared when he was discussing his need to know what other offices and departments on campus are doing regarding programming or services for various concerns. Scott noted that his ability to conduct a wide variety of programs, and to see where student services operations fit with the rest of the institution, did not make him unique. "Anybody 225 in residence halls is doing a little bit about all what those other offices are doing on their own campuses....Basically, to do the job right, you’ve got to know that," said
Scott. Thus, he does not consider his knowledge of or ability to conduct various programs offered by other offices to be outside of the range of normal conduct for his profession.
Summary
The knowledge middle managers expressed regarding the culture and environment of Midwestern University appeared to impact their decisions and actions regarding job performance and information processing. The "family" metaphor, for instance, appears to encourage parents to call upon top administrators whenever there is a problem or concern. Scott realizes that the president or other top administrators may become involved in issues on which they have no knowledge or expertise; as a result, he tries to keep his own boss informed so that George, in turn, may inform other administrators.
The "family" theme also affects Jay as he attempts to move the institution toward greater use of assessment techniques. The "family" focus and image may impact Midwestern’s ability to attract a more diverse student body. Jay seemed to believe that a greater focus on assessment issues would help Midwestern develop programs that would appeal to a wider student audience. Thus, Jay locates and provides a great deal of information related to the effectiveness of assessment as a 226 means of fine-tuning and improving the educational services offered by the university.
For Joyce and Carrie, the "family" theme is generally very helpful. Both the admissions office and the Annual Fund office emphasize the "family" aspects of the institution: prospective students and their parents are shown how the "family" atmosphere at Midwestern will enhance the educational experience of the students, and alumni are encouraged to reflect back on the close sense of community that they experienced while attending Midwestern. The emphasis on the "family" image is thus stressed in the information provided by both of these offices.
Knowledge regarding the institution’s decision-making process, and the impact of the university’s educational mission on the decisions that are made, is very helpful to Scott in particular. Because Midwestern is primarily a teaching institution, Scott realizes that faculty play an important role in the university’s decisions. The emphasis on students and their well-being is also an important consideration in institutional decisions. Thus, when a decision must be made, the various options are evaluated based on the impact each will have on the overall mission of the institution.
In addition, faculty will most likely be involved in most decisions, particularly if the issue is one that has any relationship to teaching. If Scott thinks that it will be helpful to have faculty input or involvement on decisions affecting the 227 student life area, he will make sure that various faculty members are well-informed regarding the activities and resource needs of his division.
Joyce also expressed an understanding of what is important to the success of the institution. The function of an admissions office is to recruit qualified students and to help ensure a sufficient number of new students each year to meet budgetary requirements. The information that Joyce handles in her job relates to her office’s ability to meet both of these objectives.
Because of the public relations nature of much information related to admissions and related activities, Joyce realizes that she must be careful in handling and transmitting this information. As a result, Joyce strives to ensure that the information she provides is accurate. In addition, Joyce attempts to make sure that the information that is made available will not harm the institution. Her ultimate concern is that the information not be used in a way that will reflect badly on the university, or damage the institution’s recruiting, teaching, or fund- raising efforts.
Finally, professional axiomatic knowledge appeared to play a role in how middle managers carried out some of their job assignments. Joyce noted that admissions professionals focus on numbers (applications, deposits, yield ratios) because these numbers are a means of holding the office accountable for its actions.
Unlike many other offices on campus, which do not have any apparent means of measuring results, the efforts of the admissions office can be displayed graphically each year. Joyce feels it is important to provide the most accurate information 228 possible, and to ensure that that information is "trustworthy" year after year. She therefore concentrates most of her information processing efforts on quantitative data.
Scott’s perception of what student life officers must know and do in order to provide appropriate services also guides him in the information he chooses to provide to others. Scott drew on his professional knowledge to provide part of the rationale for adopting policies regarding co-ed housing. His familiarity with student development theories and literature helped him build an acceptable argument for other administrators.
In addition, Scott’s interest in and knowledge of the operations of other offices on campus is something he feels is necessary in order to do his job well.
Thus, Scott tries to learn as much as possible about the ftmctioning of other departments on campus "to do the job right." CHAPTER X
PERSONAL AXIOMATIC KNOWLEDGE
While much of Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) framework was useful in examining
the cultural knowledge of middle managers as it related to individual job
performance, the model appeared insufficient to examine and understand the impact
these managers have on decision making within the institution. Sackmann’s
framework seems to work well in defining and explaining certain types of cultural
knowledge, but is silent regarding other categories of cultural knowledge. This
seemed to be especially noticeable with respect to personal values and beliefs, as
opposed toinstitutional values and beliefs.
In reviewing various segments that had been labelled as "axiomatic", a fifth
category began to emerge from the data. There appeared to be a distinction between axiomatic knowledge (meaning an underlying assumption of the institution) and what
this study termed axiom-own knowledge (meaning an underlying assumption of the
individual). In some cases, these two types of knowledge appeared to match, while
in others, the personal axiomatic knowledge seemed quite different from institutional
axiomatic knowledge.
229 230
Many of the statements made by middle managers in this study contained elements of personal values. In fact, the close relationship between recipe and personal axiomatic knowledge at first masked the existence of "axiom-own" knowledge as a separate category. For example, the middle managers often expressed recipe knowledge in terms of whether the actions or decisions were
"right," according to their own personal beliefs. In some cases, what the middle manager might consider right or correct was not necessarily what other individuals or the institution considered to be right or correct. One’s own individual beliefs, values, and feelings guided their interpretation of what should or should not be done.
There is a fine line between what someone is advocating or prescribing and why they personally think it is desirable. Why would someone prescribe, advocate, or suggest something if the proposed solution violated some value or belief they held? While in some cases it could be that the suggested action is related to personal beliefs, in others it could be that someone prescribes it (nominally) for the
"good of the institution" based on one’s view of what is good for the university.
With one exception, the middle managers in this study expressed personal axiomatic knowledge in every interview. Personal axiomatic knowledge appeared alone-that is, not in combination with other categories of cultural knowledge-on many occasions. Table 7 shows the distribution of personal axiomatic knowledge statements that appeared alone in the interviews. 231
Table 7. Frequency of Personal Axiomatic Responses
Frequency of Name Interview Axiom-Own Statements
Jay 1 3
2 4
3 12
Scott 1 6
2 2
3 5
Joyce 1 10
2 6
3 6
Carrie 1 3
2 4
3 0
Personal axiomatic also appeared in combination with other categories of cultural knowledge, as shown in Table 8. 232
Table 8. Co-Occurrence of Personal Axiomatic Knowledge with Other Cultural Knowledge
Name Interview Dictionary Directory Recipe Axiomatic
Jay 1 0 3 2 0
2 0 0 4 0
3 0 8 11 0
Scott 1 0 0 0 1
2 0 1 2 0
3 0 0 3 0
Joyce 1 6 1 1 0
2 0 6 3 1
3 0 0 6 0
Carrie 1 0 2 8 1
2 0 3 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 233
As illustrated in Table 8, personal axiomatic rarely appeared in conjunction with dictionary knowledge, but was found fairly regularly in combination with directory, recipe, and axiomatic knowledge.
In discussing the themes that appear in personal axiomatic knowledge, it is hard not to address the impact of that knowledge on directory, recipe, or axiomatic knowledge in general. The themes in personal axiomatic knowledge tended to indicate something about the values and assumptions of the middle managers, and often revealed how this knowledge affected the middle managers as they performed their jobs.
Themes in Personal Axiomatic Knowledge
The three themes that arose in personal axiomatic knowledge were values and beliefs, assumptions and perceptions, and the impact of the middle manager’s personal views on job performance. Each of these themes contained several components, as illustrated in Table 9. 234
Table 9. Themes in Personal Axiomatic Knowledge
Assumptions & Influence of Values, Values & Beliefs Perceptions Beliefs, & Perceptions
Team work Perceptions of others Effect of beliefs on What is "good for the (attitudes, roles) research choices institution" Perceptions of self Impact of perceptions Roles of administrators Perceptions of the on job performance Hopes and ideals institution Value or impact of information Self-satisfaction
Values and Beliefs
Teamwork. Toward the end of the first interview, as Jay was speaking about the perceived division between faculty and staff, he said that it was important for both administrators and faculty "To realize that we’re all in it together." If faculty and administrators would accept this notion, according to Jay, it would help institutions to deal effectively with the pressures and problems that will face higher education in the coming decade. Thus, Jay appears to believe that universities such as Midwestern must be able to develop a sense of teamwork among various constituencies within the institution.
Jay made several other statements that seemed to indicate his belief in teamwork as an important value: 235
I think there is a place for academic administrators, that they’re part of the team. They are a support service to the faculty, they’re a support service with the faculty, (first interview)
I think as funds become more limited, as financial aid becomes more limited, as people, as parents, as legislators demand more and more accountability for what’s happening, is going to necessitate the employees of the university working as a team, rather than "we" and " they." (first interview)
In Jay’s view, faculty and administration need to work as a team, with each
constituency respecting the role and contribution of the other in order to strengthen the institution. Again, he seems to call upon forces outside of his office--and even external to the institution-to strengthen his views. As the environment of higher
education (including various constituencies such as parents and legislators) calls for
increasing accountability, greater cooperation within the institution will be critical
for success.
Carrie also spoke of the value of team work. During the first interview, she talked about a recent fund-raising event that she felt had been successful. She believed that the success of the event was due to the team spirit and cooperation
shown: "Every director that could have been there was there and they all chipped
in to play whatever role I needed them to play at the time." Thus, working together
as a team appears to be something she personally values.
Carrie is increasingly using the team work concept with her own staff. While
Carrie believes she should formulate solutions or plans for her office, she is expanding the involvement of staff members in this endeavor, as well. The 236
involvement of staff members seems to parallel Carrie’s experiences with Ernest;
he has high expectations of Carrie and of the other directors in his division, and has
given them permission to take on more responsibilities. This is a tactic with which
Carrie apparently agrees.
During her first interview, when asked how the interim vice-president differed from the previous individual, she noted that Ernest "has the ability to let us do our work, let us work together, help us work together." Carrie, in turn, began
expecting more from her staff. During the final interview, Carrie used a metaphor
to explain her developing perspective on management:
I’ve become more assertive, but I’ve also become more self- sufficient....! compare it a lot to raising children, when you develop them but you let them go at the same time and you tell them that, you know, when a kid falls down or can’t climb up or something, and can’t put her shirt on, and you go "Yeah, you can." And you can sit there and you can do it for them because it’s easier, but then they don’t learn.
Thus, as Carrie has been experiencing growth in terms of her involvement and professional development, she begins to expect and encourage more growth and
involvement from her staff members. At the same time, she does not tell them that they should be growing or involving themselves more in the management of the office. Instead, she creates an environment in which growth and involvement are possible.
The good of the institution. Carrie occasionally talked about "shoulds" or
"needs" without revealing an underlying personal value system. These statements 237
instead appeared to reflect a "good of the institution" perspective: fund raisers need to ask for bigger contributions; fund raisers should stretch their expectations. These are more or less impersonal values. Fund raisers should do these things because they will help Multi-Purpose Midwestern University. Underlying this could be the
value that one should do what is necessary to support the institution, even if it is something one is not personally accustomed to-or even comfortable-doing.
Jay believes that faculty and staff members must develop a broader perspective of the institution as a while. One way to do this, Jay said, is through the use of management techniques such as Total Quality Management (TQM). As
Jay noted, "I think TQM is a definite way of getting the institution to focus."
Another means of developing broader perspective, especially for faculty, is to encourage people to attend workshops and speak with professionals in other fields or institutions. Jay stated that "One of the things that does not happen enough around here is our faculty getting out of the confines of [this town] and talking to other people in the world." Toward that end, Jay has actively sought to encourage deans and department heads to identify faculty members who would like to attend workshops on assessment offered by Alverno College. Jay himself has attended workshops offered by Alverno, and was profoundly impressed by the information and insights he gained there. He believes that this would be a very worthwhile experience for faculty members, as well. 238
Ultimately, Jay would like the faculty and staff at Midwestern to understand and embrace classroom assessment. He believes that an institutional commitment to classroom assessment would strengthen the programs and educational experiences available at the university, which would, in turn, strengthen the institution as a whole.
The roles of administrators. Joyce and Jay both spoke of the roles of administrators within higher education. Jay believes that administrators are an important part of the institution because they "are helping to facilitate the students’ learning process." By providing services and helping to manage the institution, administrators make a valuable contribution to education.
Jay also expressed his perspective on his role, and on the role of administrators in general, through a combination of explicit recipe and personal axiomatic knowledge. Interestingly, Jay’s focus on boundaries again arises.
That concerns me that we have as much, it would seem as if we have a tremendous amount of latitude, and I don’t think any administrative office should have that much, should have, whether it’s real or perceived, latitude, (third interview; emphasis added)
Where he expressed concerns elsewhere regarding the boundaries between offices,
Jay here seems to believe that there should be boundaries on the amount of autonomy or authority that middle managers are permitted or able to exercise.
Joyce’s comments on administrators were more narrowly focused. She spoke of middle managers in particular and noted the sometimes precarious position occupied by mid-level administrators: 239
[B]eing at that second-tier level, you have the freedom to make choices and decisions, but you don’t have a lot of the downward pressure put on by other people. The downside is, you have to please both sides...you’re not completely free to make all decisions ’cause there is somebody that wants to have something a certain way...you have to then be the translator of those ideas to the people who actually have to implement them, (first interview)
At the same time, Joyce prefers the middle level of administration to upper levels, because she perceives individuals in those positions as operating without a "safety net." Joyce feels that middle managers have greater contact with other staff members, and that they are less likely to work in a vacuum.
Hopes and ideals. Jay was the only middle manager to discuss his hopes for the future of Midwestern and of his department. During the first interview, he mentioned that he had interviewed at several other universities over the past several years, but ultimately chose not to accept any of the positions offered by those schools. Part of the reason for choosing to remain at Midwestern was his belief that the university has not yet reached its potential. Jay expects that, within the next ten to fifteen years, Midwestern will begin to make a significant impact on the surrounding area; he would like to be at Midwestern when this happens.
Jay is also hopeful that the institution will soon recognize the value of the assessment programs that he advocates.
...I have to keep telling myself, "Be patient, it will eventually all fall into place." My hope is that at some point the institution will see the value of all this, [and] not wait for Uncle Sam...to come in and say, "Hey folks, this is what you have to do, this is when you will do it, and this is how you will do it." (third interview) 240
Jay stated that one of his fears is that higher education in general, and Midwestern in particular, will wait too long to make decisions or take action to increase accountability, and that this will result in the government dictating goals and policies for universities and colleges.
Value or impact of information. Jay and Joyce both discussed the importance of information, and the impact or perceived value that information has for them in their jobs. For Jay, the information obtained from external sources has significance in what he is trying to accomplish at Midwestern. Specifically, he looks to the
Alverno model for classroom assessment to provide guidelines for Midwestern’s assessment programs.
The thing that I think one benefits from looking at the Alverno model, is that it’s impossible for you to duplicate it because any assessment program is institutionally unique. That if Midwestern comes up with a program, it will in no way, shape or form satisfy [other area institutions]. And vice versa. But what it does show you is what the possibilities are. (third interview)
Jay is excited about the possibilities that he sees for Midwestern as it develops and implements a classroom assessment program. He believes that such a program will have a profound and positive impact on the university.
As might be expected, Joyce had a great deal to say about the impact and value of information for her job. When she first came to Midwestern, the admissions office data base was not always accurate. Joyce focused much of her attention on building up the data base and increasing the accuracy and consistency of the information it contained. To a large extent, she believes she has 241 accomplished this now, as she said that "[W]e can feel pretty comfortable about the reliability of [the data]." However, when information appears not to be trustworthy,
Joyce will "go back and look for proof that.. .past experience says you can trust."
The information of which Joyce is speaking is obtained from many sources, although to a large extent Joyce concentrates on the information found in the computer. As a result, she has built a network of individuals in various offices who have access to the computer system and can obtain objective data when asked. This information, in turn, is passed on to her boss or to other staff members on campus.
Joyce believes that there are times when "the data speak very loudly in terms of the decision that we will make."
Joyce is aware that her role in information management may permit her to influence decisions:
It’s interesting to look at it from that perspective to see just how much control a person who’s not [a] decision maker really--I mean, in terms of an upper-level management-how much control they really can have, (second interview)
Later in the same interview, Joyce explained her role in handling information from student questionnaires and noted that she has almost total control over the data obtained from the surveys.
And perhaps influence whatever decision [Frank] would have. Looking, for example, at evaluating admitted student questionnaires. That’s a prime example of something over which I have total control. No one else really reads them or interprets them or compiles the data, and based on what I see as trends in that, [I] can have a significant influence on how the rest of the campus interprets that, (second interview) 242
At the same time, Joyce realizes that others on campus view information and the decision making process differently than she does.
...[A]s you go along, and you get more pulled into the political operation of a university, you tend to kind of second-guess things rather than be a little more objective. And that can be a problem sometimes. But, you know, still, when the data don’t lie, and when you see something, if it comes out pretty strongly, you’re still going to present that fact, that information, (second interview)
Thus, for Joyce, it appears that data is valuable in itself, and that it is also valuable because it can provide a guideline for decisions. Without objective data, Joyce seems to feel that political aspects would unduly color decisions.
Self-satisfaction. The middle managers in the study generally find their jobs to be rewarding and satisfying. Three of the four participants stated that working in higher education administration, particularly at an institution such as Midwestern, permits them to interact with other individuals who share similar values. In addition, the work itself, and the environment in which the work takes place, was viewed positively.
Joyce and Carrie, for instance, both included the "product" of their work- helping to provide an education for students-as part of what they liked best about their jobs:
Working on a college campus. With people who basically share similar values about education. Having students as your product, and the education of those students as the product. (Joyce, first interview) 243
I feel good about the product. Higher education has always been a part of my life because of the way that my father was....So it feels good being in that environment....I have a lot of respect for, and I feel good about being able to support that. (Carrie, first interview)
Carrie also stated that she hopes her children will eventually choose to attend a school like Midwestern, as she feels the environment of the institution is beneficial to student development.
Scott enjoys higher education administration for slightly different reasons.
The aspect of his job that he finds most satisfying is "its cyclical nature." He noted that many jobs outside of higher education administration have no cycle, and people in those positions have "no feeling of closure." With his job, Scott sees a regular yearly cycle, from the opening of the residence halls in the fall to Homecoming,
Thanksgiving, and the end of each school year. This gives him a sense of accomplishment.
Another aspect of higher education that Scott finds enjoyable is working with the students themselves. He stated that working with students
[Kjeeps you young, it’s trite but it really does....I’ve found that if I’m around a bunch of people who are my age, who are in the real world, I don’t have an awfiil lot to talk to them about. Their problems aren’t the same. Their outlook isn’t the same, (first interview)
Scott therefore includes his involvement with students as being a highly satisfying aspect of his job. 244
Assumptions and Perceptions
Perceptions of others. The middle managers made many comments that reflected their perceptions or assumptions regarding faculty and other staff members on campus, usually as these behaviors or attitudes related to the middle manager.
In some instances, these comments also indicated the middle manager’s perspective regarding the role or characteristics they felt necessary for a particular position.
For Joyce, the assumptions and perceptions she had of other staff members at Midwestern influenced her decision to accept a position at the university.
When I looked at the people who worked here and people in admissions who worked here, and you have a certain level of respect for those people, you say, "Well, you know, there’s obviously something attractive about the institution for those people to be supporting it," then that does a lot in terms of your respect for those people, therefore...there’s something good, you know. There’s a good there, (first interview)
Prior to accepting a job at Midwestern, Joyce had not had strong feelings about the institution. As a result of her perceptions regarding the staff, however, Joyce decided to work for the university.
Sometimes the perceptions expressed about the attitudes of others were not related to individuals on Midwestern’s campus. Scott provides an example of this type of statement. He spoke of wanting to take part in the study because of the focus on mid-level administrators:
I mean, I have no ulterior motives, but I think most middle managers feel neglected. Everybody does studies on upper management, everybody does studies on the "new professional." Practically nobody looks at the guy in the middle, (first interview) 245
Thus, Scott’s feeling that he was part of a group that is traditionally neglected or omitted from study made him more interested in participating.
Scott also talked about his perceptions of particular staff members or offices in the context of working with those individuals or departments. He recognizes that his perspective on what is or is not important is different from that of other staff members. His comments on this topic seem to indicate a slight annoyance or frustration in dealing with other offices regarding student life issues:
No, we need to do it now, it’s really important. And their view of it is, "Well, yes, it’s really important, but so are these other things that are important, too." They just don’t get the sense of urgency a lot of times, with a lot of problems, (second interview)
Because Scott’s area operates on a 24-hour basis, he often needs to handle issues or resolve problems at times that are not convenient for other offices. Scott indicated that many offices do not realize the importance and impact of time factors on his department.
Scott also sees a similar attitude among faculty members. Where faculty members in the past seemed to him to be very involved in the lives and education of their students, Scott does not perceive a similar level of interest among the current (newer) faculty. 246
I think faculty everywhere are becoming more 9-to-5. And more and more of those real old-line, really caring educators are retiring and moving on, and what we’ve got now are instructors. And specialists. More that people who aren’t really interested in education and people. You see that in larger institutions, with the guy that’s now, he’s here so he can do his research and "Oh, yeah, I’ve got to teach these classes, too." Same kind of approach, except in a microcosm, (third interview)
These perceptions of faculty and other administrators color Scott’s assumptions about the institution itself, as will be discussed in a later section.
Jay likewise interprets faculty attitudes to be contrary to his objectives. He feels this is due, in part, to the professional education of faculty members.
It’s the traditional folks that I think see us as kind of meddlers, as potential meddlers, in their affairs. Not as colleagues, not as consultants, but as maybe someone meddlesome. "Who are they to tell us?"....I think we have, though, a lot of faculty that really don’t appreciate or don’t fully comprehend what this is all about. They’ve gone through a graduate program that is counter to the assessment movement. You know, no one teaches a Ph.D. how to teach, (third interview)
As a result of their academic preparation, Jay sees faculty members as feeling somewhat threatened by the assessment movement. While they may be very knowledgeable regarding subject matter, Jay does not view faculty as being confident in the quality of classroom instruction they provide.
Jay also seemed to believe that the institution as a whole is hesitant to adopt assessment because the results may run contrary to Midwestern’s image of itself.
In Jay’s view, 247
Midwestern’s afraid to take a look at itself. Doesn’t want to look at itself, and so, therefore, one the one hand, yeah, to say that we have an assessment center that is doing this testing and has all these reports...you know, on the one hand we can boast, the president can boast if he knows about it, the Provost can. But on the other hand, we don’t want to use the data because it might tell us something that we really don’t want to know, (third interview)
As a result, Jay believes that faculty will not be very supportive of the assessment program at Midwestern unless and until higher-ranking faculty and administrators embrace assessment principles. Absent that level of interest and support, Jay fears that assessment may be allowed to fade away.
I have to think that the faculty, and this is probably like faculties everywhere, are just hoping this damned thing goes away, you know? "We’ll do as little as we can," what have you. And so things are at this point, in my opinion, are dragging, (third interview)
During his third interview, Jay also revealed implied recipe knowledge regarding the president’s role in decision making. Again, personal values seem evident in his statement:
The president here is highly involved in a lot of the decision making. I think he hasn’t leamed-maybe he’s in the process of learning-but I think that he hasn’t learned the art of delegation to the extent that I...would hope that he would.
Jay appears to feel that a different decision making process is desirable, and perhaps even necessary, although he does not directly state this opinion.
Scott must also rely on his own sense of what will work for his division when dealing with individuals outside of his office who attempt to impose changes. Scott 248 understands the conflicting perspectives of various constituencies of the institution, as evidenced by the following statements regarding residence hall policies:
[Y]ou don’t make those decisions based on a theological basis, whereas of course, when a minister comes in here, he doesn’t care anything about the business end of the deal, [saying] "You should do it this way." Even though you know that if you did it that way, we wouldn’t have any students, because kids aren’t going to come here if our residence halls are dry and had no intervisitation, (second interview)
Scott must be aware of conflicting demands and perspectives, but must also be ready to defend his own perspective when he feels that it is the most reasonable. He appears to have a sense of what students expect, and what they will accept as reasonable residence hall policies. Scott must find a way to educate others, or to counter their arguments, when he believes it is in the best interests of his division.
The middle managers in the study all shared thoughts and perceptions about their supervisors. Each middle manager in the study generally expressed very positive sentiments regarding his or her boss, and noted that the support and encouragement received from these individuals was essential to effective job performance.
Joyce and Scott both noted that, over time, they have identified what they think is important to their bosses. For both of these middle managers, the beliefs and values of the supervisor play a role in the middle manager’s job performance.
This was especially pronounced in Joyce’s case, as Frank had arrived at Midwestern just two years after she started working for the university. Joyce had known her previous boss very well, but was totally unfamiliar with Frank or with his 249 management style. As a result, Joyce spent almost a year trying to decipher what was important to her supervisor, particularly as it related to information needs.
Once she had determined Frank’s preferences, Joyce concentrated on providing the kinds of information that he seemed to want.
I think, for him, that was, being able to come through with those kinds of things is probably what sold him on trusting me. That I did have some idea of what was going on and could understand the computer and make it work for what, how he wanted it to. (second interview)
Thus, Joyce’s understanding of the types of information preferred by Frank influences, to some extent, the information that she will provide for him.
Similarly, Scott has developed an interpretation of what is important to
George. Scott’s understanding of George’s principles influences his perception of how his job should be performed.
And there’s one thing I’ll always say about that man, is that he’s got a real strong set of right and wrong, and principles, and the way you do things, and that’s the way you do things. There’s no shortcuts, there’s no way around it, there’s no "Let’s go this way this time, we can get by." We handle them this way. (third interview; emphasis in original)
As a result of this interpretation, Scott seems to know how to handle any given situation so that it will conform to George’s standards. Thus, in addition to understanding George’s values in terms of the relative importance of certain issues,
Scott also feels that George has clearly defined the process for handling any situation. 250
Carrie, on the other hand, did not express a clear understanding of what was expected of her in terms of job performance. This was due to the fact that, during the course of this study, there was some uncertainty as to who would be named to the vice-presidential position for Carrie’s division. During the first two interviews,
Carrie was dealing with the transition from one boss to an interim supervisor.
Because she did not expect Ernest to be named to the position permanently, it seemed that Carrie did not focus on examining or conforming with his management style. Rather, she seemed to be interested in learning from Ernest while he was there, but fully expected someone else to be made her supervisor.
Carrie seemed to expect that several changes would occur when a new supervisor was named. She fully believed that, unlike previous supervisors, the next vice-president would have a background in fund-raising and development, and that this would make a difference in the operations of her division.
I fully expect the next person to be a fund raiser, and to know how to do it right. And that is going to be a huge improvement, but there’s always that worry about the personality aspect, the ability to provide the feedback, and to challenge him or her when they’re wrong, (second interview)
The decision to name Ernest to the vice-president’s position caught Carrie by surprise. She viewed herself as having more experience in fund-raising than Ernest, and also had to adapt to his management style. By the last interview, however,
Carrie seemed to have developed respect for Ernest’s level of expertise in development and also for his supervisory style. 251
Finally, one middle manager talked about his perceptions of and relationship with the institution’s president. Jay talked about his assumptions and understanding of the president’s personal agenda, and also discussed how that agenda affects Jay’s efforts in the area of assessment. Jay sees the president’s interests as falling primarily in the areas of fund-raising and institutional image, and he assumes that this agenda is known and sanctioned by the Board of Trustees. Jay sees the president as being focused on external issues, which limits his ability or interest in dealing with internal issues such as classroom assessment. This is of major concern to Jay, as he feels that the president’s involvement in and support of assessment is vital to the success of Jay’s efforts.
Just prior to the conclusion of the study, Jay and the president had a two-hour meeting regarding assessment issues on campus. Jay said that the meeting had come about in response to a conference the president had attended, where assessment issues and the impact of government regulations were the main topics of conversation.
...[T]his meeting with [the president], the first meeting in, what? Two and a half years that we’ve been over here, and he was sincerely interested. At least he gave that impression. And I think it’s because he feels that there’s now an external force out there, and if we don’t get our act together, someone will get it together for us. Private institution, public, it makes no difference....[The president] is very concerned. And so I’m glad he’s concerned, because-and you know, I think [the president] is not unlike a lot of faculty, thinking "Why do we need assessment?" (third interview) 252
At the conclusion of this study, Jay seemed to feel that his department was still in a delicate position. While he and his colleague continue to try to educate faculty and administrators on assessment issues, there is still not a strong showing of support from the top levels of the institution. Jay’s comments during the final interview, which was punctuated by many pauses and audible sighs, seemed to indicate that he foresees no immediate change in the institution’s attitude toward assessment and related issues.
Perceptions of self. All of the middle managers in the study made statements relating to their perceptions regarding their abilities, needs, interests, job performance, and roles within the university.
Scott, for example, talked about his personal history and interests as these related to his choice to enter higher education administration. As mentioned previously, Scott needed to find a job upon leaving the service. When he reviewed his work experience up to that point, he realized that he had found his position as a resident advisor during college to be the most enjoyable. He returned to school to obtain a Master’s degree in student personnel work and has been employed in the residence life and student services field ever since.
His experience in the field has shaped his perception of what is needed in order to do his job well. Thus, as he noted, he needs to understand the various services and operations of the offices on campus in order to function effectively. 253
In addition, Scott believes it is important to remain as "student-centered" as possible.
I think I’ve maintained being student-centered as much as you can. I mean, I’ve been at it for 15 years, and I still won’t take the institution’s side in a lot of arguments with students, or issues with students. I’ll still see the student’s side of view, (third interview)
When Scott needs to make a decision, or needs to obtain information in order to enable others to make decisions, he seeks to do so with the interests of the students in mind.
Many of Joyce’s comments regarding her self-perceptions related to her position within the organizational hierarchy of Midwestern University. Joyce appears to be very content with her current position, and with the level of that position in the organization. As she noted during her first interview,
I wouldn’t want to be at the top....So it’s a good position for me....I also know that as a person I am very much more qualified to be a support person, in that I am very good at carrying out someone else’s ideas, but I am not, and part of it comes from lack of experience, but I don’t see myself as being the kind of person who yearns to be in a position of making big picture policy decisions. I am much better at taking the policy decision and carrying it out....And some people just find that to be the most mundane thing in the world, but for me, I mean because like I’m able to work with people in making those decisions, and that.. .those decisions are ones that you can see a definite end, and a definite sense of closure.
Rather than feeling neglected as a middle manager, then, Joyce seems to relish the role; it permits her to participate to the degree that she is comfortable in making decisions, yet frees her from the responsibility of the "big picture" decisions. In fact, Joyce joked about her position as a middle manager by saying that she is able 254
to "do a whole lot of stuff without the headaches" that accompany upper administrative or policy-making positions.
Joyce’s self-observations also provide some insight into her preferences regarding information. While discussing some of the personality and cognitive style instruments Joyce was completing for a graduate course, Joyce indicated that she is generally dissatisfied with the structure and results of such tests and instruments.
Number one, I don’t like to think about those emotional kinds of things and secondly because there always are choices that aren’t accurate. And so having to choose between the things, one that, either one that’s not particularly on target, (third interview)
Through this statement, Joyce again illustrates her tendency to think rationally and logically and to avoid emotional issues. It seems natural, given this inclination, that
Joyce would rely on factual, objective information when called on to obtain or interpret information in her job. Thus, in addition to adhering to her boss’s preferences for certain types or sources of information, Joyce is exercising her own innate predilection for objective, rational data.
Several of Jay’s comments and self-observations were related to his perception of his performance in the past few years. For the most part, his evaluation of his success is geared to the success and progress he sees for the assessment center and its programs.
Jay noted that he generally does not see the kind of progress he had expected to see, and feels that progress is taking longer than he would like. He said that he and his colleague in the center both "feel we have to continually prove ourselves." 255
Jay feels the current organizational structure of the institution, and the assessment center’s place within the organizational hierarchy, causes confusion for administrators and faculty alike.
I think that the success of the assessment center, or my success or lack of it, is really directly related, directly tied to the institution’s commitment to an assessment process, whatever that assessment process is. So I guess, then, I temper my feelings of how I evaluate myself...given the institutional climate, I think we’re doing~Fm doing -probably, as best as I can do. And I think the center is doing the best it can do. (third interview)
In listening to and speaking with Jay, however, one senses that, while he may be doing the best he can do under the circumstances, he would prefer to be doing far more in the area of assessment.
Carrie also talked about some of her personal preferences in terms of work and management style. She reflected on her expectations as an employee and also as a manager of other staff members. For example, Carrie observed Ernest and his management style as he came into the role of acting vice-president and wondered how she would handle a similar position:
[Y]ou look at that, you think of yourself in that position someday, you wonder how do you handle, best handle that, how do you orchestrate it all? How do you be that conductor without micro-managing? You want to be involved enough to help them do their job, but you can’t get to the point where you’re down there [doing their job for them], (second interview)
By the same token, Carrie noted during her early interviews that she was not comfortable taking action without prior approval from a variety of managers or supervisors. 256
I realize that I ’m the type of person that insists upon having all twelve people that think they need to look at it, look at die letter. There’s no sense of pride in it for me. There’s no sense of, you know, "Darn it, I wrote the letter, I thought it was good, the Communications Services person who is a writer proofed it for me, we know it’s a good letter, what is your problem?" I’m not, I don’t have that, I don’t know if it’s ego or what, but I’m perfectly happy with everybody having input into it....One, if they want to see it, that’s perfectly fine with me and two, nobody can come back to me and say I didn’t. do If it it doesn’t right work, if it goes out in the mail and it doesn’t work, it wasn’t completely my idea alone, (second interview; emphasis added)
For Carrie, the desire to avoid blame for decisions or actions that are unsuccessful was a major concern, especially when she was first learning Ernest’s management style. Over time, however, Carrie appeared to become more willing to make decisions without involving "all twelve people." Rather than wait for approval from
Ernest before taking action on any given project, Carrie learned to approach him with only two or three priorities; the rest she has learned to handle on her own.
There is another benefit for Carrie in learning to take action: it permits her to follow her plans and stay within time lines established for her projects. Carrie relies heavily on "to-do" lists, charts, and written plans. In preparing for major solicitation campaigns or donor contacts, Carrie tends to outline every activity that supports the solicitation, even down to when she will choose the paper and ink for the letter or brochure. This reliance on planning also appeared as she was preparing to welcome a new supervisor; Carrie and her staff developed an extensive planning document to present to the new vice-president to demonstrate that they were ready 257 and able to move forward with the Annual Fund drive. As Carrie noted, "[A]t least you feel like a professional if you’ve got some sort of plan."
However, when she felt the need to consult with Ernest and other administrators prior to making any decision, Carrie often found that it took much longer to complete a project than might otherwise be expected. In some instances,
Carrie was unable to complete a task because she was unable to obtain permission for a mailing or brochure.
In recent months, as Carrie has become more willing to take responsibility on her own, the Annual Fund operation at Midwestern has seen a tremendous increase in contributions. During the final interview, Carrie reported that the
Annual Fund drive for the 1993-94 year was $50,000 ahead of the previous year’s level for the same time period.
Perceptions of the institution. Carrie, Joyce and Scott expressed their perceptions of the institution in a way that reflected personal axiomatic knowledge, which in some cases also included axiomatic knowledge of the institution itself. For these middle managers, institutional perceptions seemed to have an impact on how they made decisions about their jobs.
For example, a recurring statement for Scott was that Midwestern is undergoing something of an identity crisis. As he noted, 258
Midwestern, I think, is, within the next five to ten years, is going to be wrestling with its identity. And they’re, they’re denying that right now. And what they’re going to be wrestling with is the fact that the undergraduate population is going to be the minority, (second interview)
[M]y impression of Midwestern University at the moment, or at least up until very recently, has been that Midwestern is desperately seeking an identity. ’Cause it doesn’t have one. On the one hand, we try to sell to the freshmen that we’re this caring, small, Bible college, that it’s a real family-oriented institution. The reality of the matter is there’s over 3,000 students at Midwestern University and only about half of them are undergraduates. And not all of them live on campus....It’s rapidly becoming to the point that we are not an undergraduate institution anymore. I don’t know what kind of conscious decision is being made there, but we keep marketing it like we are, but we’re not....[T]here’s a lot more involved with Midwestern, I think, than just being an undergraduate institution. (third interview)
Some of these statements may, to some degree, echo the axiomatic knowledge regarding the institution that was presented in the previous chapter. At the same time, however, these statements also reflect a personal perception and belief system regarding the institution.
Scott views the emphasis on the "family" metaphor as problematic. His proximity and involvement with students enables him to see the impact of the
"family" theme on their perceptions of the institution: 259
I think that there is some difficulty in selling it as hard as they do. It would be nice to say we’re a "family-like" institution. But, I think, sometimes rapidly the student realize that fact that, yeah "Midwestern is family "--[gestures like he is wadding paper up and throwing it away] -and that goes by the wayside real quick. But mom and dad’s first impression stays, and that’s that you said you were a family institution. Now you’re not sticking to family morals and values. Well, you can’t. ’Cause I can’t tell people what to think, feel, what religion to have, and that kind of thing. And then they get frustrated because "You sold us a bill of goods." Well, maybe, (third interview)
Ultimately, Scott’s concern with the "family" image projected by the university is
that students and parents will learn that this image is a fiction and will lose faith in the institution. In Scott’s mind, it appears that the "family" theme does more harm than good. As students discover the reality and limitations of the "family" metaphor, Scott must find a way to maintain some sense of trust. Yet, he must also act in accordance with the principles of his profession and within the limits of the law.
Joyce appeared to echo these sentiments, to a degree, in discussing her perspective of Midwestern’s image. While the family image sums up the social atmosphere, in Joyce’s opinion "Professional U" would be a better metaphor for the educational mission of the institution. Midwestern’s curriculum combines "liberal arts with the professional experience" and also tries to utilize the resources of the metropolitan area in which the university is located. Joyce does not see these as being competing perspectives, but rather as different aspects of a multi-faceted institution. 260
For Carrie, the image of Multi-Purpose Midwestern University is important both personally and professionally, as indicated by the following comments:
I believe in the quality of the education, I believe in the Midwestern University environment, that it’s different than...larger schools that don’t have an opportunity to get to know the students as students. I believe that that makes a difference in their particular education, the students that do attend Midwestern, and I believe that those people go on to respect other people, their community, their responsibility, and that kind of thing, because of some of those things, of how they were treated when they were here. And, so in that respect it makes it...just a lot easier to do my job. (first interview; emphasis added)
It would seem especially important that Carrie, as both a representative of the institution and as a development professional, project a positive image of the university as she solicits potential donors. Fortunately for her, she is able to project this image, as she genuinely appears to believe in the value of the educational environment found at Midwestern.
Influence of Values. Beliefs and Perceptions on Job Performance
Impact of beliefs on research choices. Jay made several statements that reflected the impact of his own personal beliefs and values on his choice of research projects and topics. Because Jay’s department is the only one on campus undertaking research on assessment and related issues, the choices he makes regarding research projects greatly impacts the information and data available to other campus offices for use in institutional-level decisions. Thus, when Jay states that "the kinds of information that we are generating is what we think is important" 261
(emphasis added), it becomes clear that his beliefs affect the amount and type of data provided to other offices on campus.
In part, it appears that Jay’s decisions regarding research are based on his belief that research should provide new information or investigate possibilities that have not been considered previously. As indicated in the following comments, Jay seems to place a fair amount of emphasis on locating and examining novel situations:
[My colleague] and I sit down and we say, "Hey...we think we ought to take a look at this or take a look at that." We talk it over with Richard, and nine times out of ten he’ll say "Aw, that’s fine. Do it." We came up with the sophomore assessment...that was our idea..../ thought it was important because it had never been done You before. know, we had never gotten the input of sophomores finishing up, just about finishing up their second year at the university....Wo one’s ever done it, so from a research point of view, it made Butsense.... from our point of view, we think it, from a research point of view, what we’re doing made sense, so we’re doing it. (second interview, emphasis added)
As indicated above, Jay and his co-worker exert a great deal of influence on the information that will be provided to decision makers and to other offices on campus because their research efforts are a reflection of what they believe to be important.
Had Jay and his colleague decided that some other topic was important, they would likely have pursued that subject instead. Consequently, the information and research that will be used or presented in making decisions depends, to a great degree, on what these particular middle managers believe to be most significant for the institution. 262
Joyce also exerts influence on the research undertaken and the subsequent information provided to other offices on campus. As noted in a previous chapter,
Joyce must sometimes decide whether to include certain information in a report or omit that information if there is a possibility it would damage the institution in some way. When Joyce believes that the information is too sensitive to share, or that it would be misinterpreted by others, she must make a choice. According to Joyce,
"[T]he choices are you don’t share it, you put it in, in a format that they can comprehend and won’t be dangerous, or, you spend the time educating them as to what it means." Although Joyce has consulted with Frank regarding information of a sensitive or potentially dangerous nature in the past, it appears that she is usually the person who makes the determination as to what data will or will not be made public.
Impact of perceptions on job performance. Recipe, directory, and personal axiomatic knowledge, when combined, often appeared as statements reflecting the middle manager’s understanding or beliefs regarding his or her job performance.
Recipe knowledge statements, in particular, revealed many occasions where the knowledge of the middle managers appeared to be predicated on their internal, personal belief systems. The recipe knowledge in these cases became not just a matter of what should be done, but also indicated why the middle manager believed as he or she did regarding that particular issue. Carrie illustrates this situation in the following comments: 263
I oftentimes, just because I think it’s the right thing to will do, fill in for the receptionist when she’s gone..../ take it very seriously. By making sure that the person on the other end is satisfied with the end result of the conversation. If they’re looking for something or the person’s not there but the message is taken appropriately, it’s just so important to me, that that image be as high as possible... .It’s important to me because I think that sets the tone and that people want to be associated with a professional organization, (third interview; emphasis added)
Carrie herself was very concerned with how others perceived her role as a professional within the institution. It seems natural, then, that she would be similarly concerned with the image of the institution itself. In addition, in Carrie’s profession the image of the institution can either help or hinder in development efforts. Thus, her life and her job will be much simpler if Multi-Purpose
Midwestern University maintains a professional image for the public. If Carrie can assist in maintaining this image by answering the phones or otherwise dealing with the public, she is very willing to do so.
In her second interview, Carrie provides recipes of what not to do or what to avoid doing if at all possible. In statements that reflect a personal axiom, she notes that part of the reason she involves so many people in her decisions is to avoid being "flamed for something I could have prevented." This seems to indicate an avoidance aspect in her strategy. While she states elsewhere in the interview that she really doesn’t care about getting the credit for any particular action, she strongly wishes to avoid being blamed for something, particularly when the fault is not her own. 264
Carrie also reflected on her role as the director of her office in terms that illustrate recipe and personal axiomatic knowledge:
[W]e’re going to figure out who needs to do what, based on everybody’s perception of where it would fit in better, even though I’ve got an idea, (first interview)
Now it’s like, he’s got some skills that I can learn from, and in turn, if nothing else, it’s easier to talk out a process openly, to solve the problem rather than always thinking I have to come to them with a solution, (first interview)
In both of these examples, Carrie avoids making a direct statement about what should happen. At the same time, however, it is clear that her values or beliefs are guiding her actions. In the first case, Carrie has already largely decided what the structure of the office should look like; she is involving others in the restructuring to give them a sense of having contributed to these decisions. In the second example, Carrie has begun talking more openly with one of her staff members, and seeking his advice on some matters, because he can help her develop solutions for problems.
Joyce’s personal axiomatic knowledge likewise affects how she tries to do her job. Because Joyce herself focuses so much on quantitative data in making decisions, it seems only natural that she provide others with data of this type when they must make decisions: 265
I think that it is a responsibility of a person in this position to provide the data so that [others] have the opportunity to make the decision based on past experience and solid information. But, I don't think as the controller of the data, it’s necessarily my role to say "Because the data says this, this is how it has to be." No, I think that...[if] people choose to go against what the data says, then that’s their choice, but at least they’re making an informed decision..../ think it’s important to have the data to-so that people know the setting and the situation and the background in which they’re making the decision. Whether they decide to go with what the data supports or not is their choice, but at least they’re making decisions based on information. (second interview; emphasis added)
Joyce, then, clearly appears to feel that others should at least have access to data and information-even if they choose not to use it-when they need to make their own decisions.
The emphasis on accountability that was expressed by both Joyce and Frank also appears in Joyce’s statements regarding recipe knowledge for student life and admissions offices, and ultimately for higher education itself:
[TJhis is my personal viewpoint, is that for student affairs, that when there isn’t that very definite, accountable figure, and it may in some universities be retention....is that, sure, they can go and house people and feed them the same, and house them the same way, and can just keep losing kids but there isn’t going to be accountability for that, so because there isn’t that accountability, people can get away with doing their jobs the way they’ve done them for the last ten or 15 years, because there isn’t that quantitative place to point the finger....So, I think universities in general need to always be in flux, because there’s that level of accountability that we have avoided, but admissions is a place where it definitely fits now, and it’s one of the first places in the university setting that it fits, (third interview; emphasis added)
Her personal perspective also influences Joyce’s beliefs as to what type of person chooses to work at an institution such as Midwestern: 266
I really think that it takes a certain kind of person, who feels good about working in the setting. And I think that it genuinely has to be somebody who cares, who cares about people...whether it’s the students you’re working with or the people that you’re interacting with within the office, (first interview; emphasis added)
As noted in a previous chapter, Scott proposed that the largest men’s residence hall should be made co-educational for a variety of reasons. From his perspective, having the hall equipped for students of either gender made sense, both financially and in terms of student development. There was a third reason for
Scott’s proposal, however. While this reason did not outweigh the other reasons for his stance, it nevertheless cannot be ignored:
And it would make my life easier, as well. I came at it from the direction that this is going to make staffing easier, ’cause if these buildings are co-ed I don’t have to worry about hiring a male or a female for any given building. I can hire either, for either building if there’s both sexes in both buildings, (second interview)
Scott tends to think in pragmatic terms, as indicated by many of his statements. If altering the physical interior of a building to accommodate students will make it easier to manage that building, then Scott will do what he can to make this objective a reality.
Scott also expressed his perceptions of the decision making process at
Midwestern, noting that a wide variety of people tend to be involved even though, in his view, only three people actually make any given decision. 267
Because of the way this institution is governed, or not governed, depending on who you talk to, there is no power structure in this institution. There isn’t. I’ve said that for years. All decisions are vested in two people. Three, actually. Vice-president for resource management, Provost, and the president. That’s it. So how much politics can you play? (second interview)
When asked whether it was possible to influence the thinking or decisions of these individuals, Scott responded that
You can, you can. But, there are so many people trying to get at them, that if you were trying to really play politics, oh man, it’d be Byzantine to try and do it. You just couldn’t do it. It’s better to go at it from a cooperative relationship, (second interview)
As a result, Scott tries to involve others in issues relating to his department rather than "play politics" to accomplish his goals.
Summary
As noted, a fifth category emerged during the course of this study that contained knowledge not previously identified by Sackmann (1991, 1992). Personal axiomatic knowledge, wherein middle managers discussed their personal beliefs and values as these related to both their information processing activities and their interpretation of the culture of the institution, formed an important and surprisingly large category of knowledge.
Through their interview comments, the middle managers indicated that they had personal perspectives and underlying assumptions that were not necessarily related to those of the institution. At the same time, however, these perspectives 268 and assumptions formed important guidelines for choosing how to perform their jobs.
Three dominant themes appeared in the category of personal axiomatic knowledge. Two of these themes, values and beliefs, and assumptions and perceptions, seemed to color the middle mangers’ overall perspectives regarding
Midwestern University and their roles in the institution. Perceptions about where one "fits" in the university, and one’s view of what is "good" for the university are to a great extent colored by the values, beliefs, perceptions and assumptions one holds.
The third category dealt with the impact that values, beliefs, assumptions and perceptions have on one’s job performance. Within this category it appears that the middle manager’s values, beliefs, perceptions and assumptions, when combined with recipe knowledge, form a significant basis for individual decisions regarding job performance, information processing, and the exercise of upward influence. CHAPTER XI
DISCUSSION
Review of the Study Objectives
Prior to discussing the findings of this study, it will be useftil to review the initial questions, assumptions and objectives on which the study was based. The first and most important set of assumptions and questions relates to the informal processes that enable middle managers to participate in and influence decisions. It was assumed that middle managers exert some type of upward influence (Chacko,
1990; Kipnis, Schmidt, Swaffin-Smith, & Wilkinson, 1984; Mowday, 1978; Schilit
& Locke, 1982) and that this influence arises from the informal activities associated with information processing and intraorganizational networks.
It was further assumed that an examination of the cultural knowledge
(Sackmann, 1991, 1992) of middle managers would reveal both their perceptions of the university and their choices regarding information processing activities and informal networks. The perspectives and cultural knowledge categories that a middle manager brings to and uses in his or her daily work life are expected to affect various aspects of job performance, especially those choices relating to information processing and exchange. Thus, the types of information considered
269 270 relevant by a middle manager, or the methods by which he or she gathers information for use by others, are assumed to be related to their understanding of the organization and of their role within it, as expressed through cultural knowledge.
Finally, it was anticipated that the organizational culture perspective would provide a useful lens through which to view the issues outlined above. The culture of an organization provides the framework within which individuals make sense of their place and role in the institution (Pettigrew, 1979). It is thus important to have some understanding regarding an organization’s culture when attempting to examine the actions of individuals who operate within the organization. In addition, the cultural knowledge framework proposed by Sackmann (1991, 1992) presupposes a culture for the organization as a whole; her framework is intended to identify and describe subcultures based on the cultural knowledge expressed by individuals within the organization. Thus, an understanding of the culture of the organization- in this case, a university--is also an important factor in this research.
Reflections on Methodology
The Ethnographic Research Perspective
This study focuses on the lived experiences of middle managers as they encounter and negotiate their daily work lives. The particular emphasis on cultural understanding in this study made it imperative that I attempt, as fully as possible, to understand the words, meaning, and actions of the participants. I therefore used 271 an ethnographic research approach for data collection in order to produce a case study of the middle managers at Midwestern University.
It is important for the reader to understand the perspectives and cultural knowledge of Jay, Scott, Joyce and Carrie, especially as these are impacted by both personal views and by the environment of the institution. Their views are reflected in the many direct quotes from each middle manager. Paradoxically, however, the power of the middle managers’ words as noted on these pages seems to contrast with the middle managers’ perceptions of a lack of power within the institution.
The middle managers often saw themselves as overlooked or neglected by their own administration. Their participation in this study enabled them to reflect on their experiences at Midwestern, and to share their perspectives with someone who was both knowledgeable about the institution and also an interested outsider.
The initial interviews were based on theoretical propositions (Yin, 1989) that guided the development of this study. These propositions were as follows:
• Some aspects of the culture of the institution can be observed and
described.
• The assumptions individuals hold regarding what does or does not
count as knowledge or information can be observed and described.
• The perceptions and assumptions of middle managers will affect the
types of information and activities these individuals employ as they
carry out their job duties. 272
• Middle managers will exert some form of upward influence, whether
intended or not, as a result of their information processing activities.
As Yin (1989) suggests, the propositions helped to identify potential questions and influenced my choices regarding research objectives and literature. I expected to revise the original propositions if the information obtained in the interviews seemed to warrant changes. What I found, however, was that the propositions were useful throughout the research.
At the same time, I remained open to the trends and issues that arose during the interviews. Thus, while the propositions helped in developing questions for the first round of interviews, subsequent interview questions arose in response to the information and discussion provided by the middle managers (Sackmann, 1991).
The interview questions used in each round of interviews appear in Appendix A.
The initial round of interviews and observations sought general information about the middle managers and their roles and activities within the institution.
These interviews and observations revealed various themes and issues which became the focus of subsequent interviews.
The second and third rounds of interviews provided an opportunity to expand on the comments and experiences described by the middle managers. Specific questions were developed to address these themes, and each interview also contained many follow-up questions that were unique to that participant. The combination of structured and semi-structured interviews furnished a great deal of information about 273 the daily work experiences, perceptions, and information processing activities of the middle managers. The information obtained and presented therefore demonstrates the usefulness of a qualitative interview strategy (Fetterman, 1989; Kvale, 1983;
Sackmann, 1991).
The information obtained also permits the reader to more fully understand what activities or strategies the middle managers use, how these strategies and activities are employed, and why middle managers consider these strategies and activities important. Since this study relies on and presents the words, perceptions and experiences of middle managers, the reader has the ability to determine the reasonableness of the data and assess whether "the results connect to how people understand the world" (Patton, 1990, p. 469). This, according to Patton (1990) is the test of the study’s face validity and credibility.
The credibility of the study is also enhanced by prolonged engagement
(Lincoln & Guba, 1985) and "extended participant observation" (Sanday, 1979, p.
527). The ability to spend an extended period of time "in the field" or at the site helps the investigator gain and maintain the trust of the research participants.
Furthermore, persistent observation, conducted over an extended time period, enables the researcher "to identify those characteristics and elements in the situation that are most relevant to the problem or issues being pursued" (Lincoln & Guba,
1985, p. 304). In this study, both prolonged engagement and persistent observation 274 added to the overall level of understanding regarding the university’s culture and the perceptions the middle managers held about their roles within the university.
The Research Participants
The middle managers and decision makers interviewed were very cooperative and provided extensive information regarding their work activities and perceptions of the institution. In addition, as noted by Dexter (1970), all of the participants were concerned with whether they were providing "useful" information during their interviews. They appeared to have a sense of responsibility in ensuring that the data obtained would be relevant to the research.
The limitation on the number of participants permitted greater depth in terms of the information obtained in this study. While Sackmann (1991, 1992) interviewed more individuals for her study, the data in this study are likely to be somewhat richer because the researcher was able to revisit topics and discuss questions and issues with the participants in greater detail.
For example, during the second and third rounds of interviews each middle manager stated that he or she had thought about the topics and discussion from our previous interview session. In several instances middle managers said they had discussed the interviews with friends or colleagues. The middle managers also indicated a desire to clarify or expand upon issues raised in previous sessions. The use of multiple interviews with each participant thus enabled both the interviewer 275 and the interviewee to reflect upon the information that surfaced in these discussions. In addition, the ability to review information with each participant, through member checks (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) or subsequent interviews, enabled the expansion of previous responses and examination of new topics or issues as they arose.
Each interview also provides a somewhat different set of cultural knowledge categories. While the first interview with each middle manager seemed to focus largely on dictionary information, the second and third rounds of interviews indicated a much broader range of cultural knowledge from each participant. Each middle manager appeared to rely on or discuss different combinations of cultural knowledge. Although the middle managers occupied positions that were generally at the same hierarchical level within the organization, no two middle managers expressed the same combination of cultural knowledge. Rather, the knowledge and perceptions expressed were unique to the individual and appeared to be based on factors such as personal values, professional orientation, and knowledge of the different constituencies and functions of the university.
The criteria used to select the middle managers aided in locating individuals who were appropriate for inclusion in this study. Jay, Scott, Joyce and Carrie each held major responsibilities for the day-to-day functions of their respective offices or departments. Each reported to a dean or vice-president who, in turn, was part of the institutional decision-making body for the university. Most of the decision 276 makers were members of several different decision making committees or task forces. Each middle manager was also expected to provide information to his or her superior in order to help that individual in the institutional decision-making process.
For the most part, each middle manager was permitted to make his or her choices regarding which information would be used in their work and where and from whom it would be obtained. The freedom and autonomy the middle managers exercised in this regard provided a meaningful context for examining the types of cultural knowledge and upward influence activities they employed.
The Organizational Culture Perspective
The organizational culture perspective (Ott, 1989) was used as a backdrop for this study because the values, assumptions, beliefs and shared understandings of the institution form the basis for working within that environment. Each middle manager—indeed, each employee-must determine his or her place within the institution. In addition, each individual must find ways to negotiate and work with and through others who, similarly, have formed their own perspectives regarding their place and role within Midwestern University. Therefore, the understanding that each middle manager has regarding the mission, culture, and environment of
Midwestern, whether shared by others or not, will impact that individual’s perceptions regarding the role he or she plays within the institution. 277
The first theoretical proposition of the study stated that some aspects of the culture of the institution could be observed and described. Through interviews, observations and documentary analysis I was able to observe several aspects of the culture of Multi-Purpose Midwestern University.
The "family" metaphor, for example, emerged as a major theme with regard to the university’s culture. The billboard at the edge of campus, the university bulletin, mailings from the Annual Fund office, and many other sources all promote this theme regularly. These items could be considered artifacts of the culture, as they are readily apparent to outsiders (Ott, 1989; Schein, 1985). Other illustrations of the "family" theme appeared in the stories Scott related about faculty members and their willingness—at least in the past—to involve themselves in the lives of their students, even to the point of visiting the residence halls to find out why a student had not been in class.
Together, these stories and traditions seem to indicate the value placed on involvement and the sense of family or community at Midwestern. The "family" metaphor could be considered evidence of one of the underlying assumptions (Ott,
1989; Schein, 1985) of the university. While one middle manager questioned the usefulness, and even the appropriateness, of such an image, other middle managers accepted the image without question. For Joyce and Carrie, the "family" metaphor was taken for granted; neither of these middle managers consciously examined whether the metaphor was suitable. 278
Another aspect of the culture of Midwestern University was the personal conviction, expressed by each middle manager, in the educational mission of the institution. The focus on teaching and learning, whether at the graduate or undergraduate level, was noted by each middle manager. Likewise, each participant stated that he or she tried to enhance this mission as much as possible through the functioning and performance of his or her office or division. While there may be some disagreement as to how Midwestern does or should go about achieving this mission, each middle manager had nevertheless formed some personal understanding of his or her role with regard to the university’s mission.
The reliance on the image of consensus in institutional decision making could be considered an illustration of the intersection of traditions, artifacts, structure, and values of Midwestern (Chaffee & Tierney, 1988; Kuh & Whitt, 1988; Ott, 1989).
As noted previously, there are a vast number of one-person offices at Midwestern
University. Thus, the involvement of many individuals in any given decision is based on both structural concerns, artifacts (as represented by the structure itself), and tradition.
In addition, the university constantly emphasizes its focus on teaching, as seen in the Midwestern University catalog, self-study report, and in conversations with middle managers and decision makers. The faculty are involved in decisions on a wide variety of topics, especially as these subjects relate to teaching and learning. The involvement of faculty, either individually or as committee members, 279 in many institutional decisions thus also represents an intersection of the traditions, values and structure (Chaffee & Tierney, 1988; Kuh & Whitt, 1988; Ott, 1989) of the university.
Finally, as suggested by Chaffee and Tierney (1988), communication--which in this study refers to information processing and exchange activities-forms a critical component of the institution’s culture. The middle managers formed networks for obtaining and exchanging information. The information thus obtained was processed or filtered in some way before being communicated to the middle manager’s supervisor.
The ability to trust others is an important component of this process. Middle managers must trust those from whom they obtain information, and decision makers must trust their middle managers to deliver accurate and relevant information for their use. Each decision maker interviewed indicated that he relied on and believed in the expertise and integrity of his subordinates. Kanter (1977) notes a similar relationship between managers and subordinates when she explains that "The uncertainty up the ranks...puts trust...at a premium. The personal loyalty normally demanded of subordinates by officials is most intense at the highest levels of organizations" (p. 53).
The level of trust top administrators place in the work and information provided by their subordinates underscores the importance of understanding the individual discretion exercised by middle managers. Factors such as the 280 perceptions, beliefs and assumptions of mid-level administrators are important components influencing the discretionary activities of middle managers. Thus, an avenue that increases knowledge regarding the choices of middle managers, such as the cultural knowledge on which they base their decisions about job performance and information processing, is useful for enhancing the understanding of how institutional decisions are made.
The Cultural Knowledge Framework
Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) cultural knowledge framework provided the impetus for examining the information processing activities of middle managers.
The original categories of cultural knowledge proposed by Sackmann (1991, 1992)— dictionary, directory, recipe and axiomatic-were present in the interview data obtained from Jay, Scott, Joyce and Carrie. Also, as in Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) study, different categories of cultural knowledge appeared to be more important to each middle manager’s understanding of his or her job than were other categories.
Cultural Knowledge Themes and Dimensions
Various themes also appeared within the different categories of cultural knowledge. The focus of this study was quite different from the focus of
Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) research; the content of the themes within the cultural 281 knowledge categories was also very different. The themes found within the different knowledge categories for both studies appear in Table 10. 282
Table 10. Dimensions and Themes
Cultural Knowledge Category Sackmann (1991, Current Study (1994) 1992)
DICTIONARY Dimensions: Dimensions: ("what") concrete/abstract personal/impersonal intentions/realizations Personal Themes: Themes: (all related to the Job duties & responsibilities organization) (individual) Goals & accomplishments Individual’s role in the Corporate structure organization Relationship between the Strategies organization and the Impersonal Themes: employees Responsibilities of the office Physical environment Responsibilities of others Strategy Perspectives on information
DIRECTORY Themes: Dimensions: ("how") How tasks are done internal/external (processes) direct/indirect (for process How people relate and strategy themes only) (relationships) Themes: How adaptation and change Process knowledge occur Relationship knowledge How knowledge is acquired Strategy and perpetuated
RECIPE Recipes of success or failure Dimensions: ("should/should not") (past orientation) implied v. explicit Recipes for success or failure Themes: (future orientation) Legitimation Themes: Pragmatic/Efficient Acting v. talking about acting Boundaries Approach to change Neglect (organizational) Salesmanship Time frame (organizational) Problem areas (organizational) 283
Table 10 (continued)
AXIOMATIC Found at highest levels only; all Themes: axiomatic knowledge related to the Institutional image and culture ("why") organization Educational mission, structure, and decision processes Religion Professional knowledge
PERSONAL n/a Themes: Values & beliefs AXIOMATIC Assumptions & perceptions Influence of values, beliefs, and assumptions on job performance
Dictionary knowledge appeared to be the most discrete of the five categories of cultural knowledge found in this study. The six themes found within the dictionary category indicate how narrowly and precisely this knowledge can be defined. The middle managers were able to distinguish clearly between the roles and expectations they themselves were required to fulfill and the roles and expectations of others. Strategic dictionary knowledge likewise focused on defining what strategy was used, with little attention to how or why this strategy was chosen.
In addition, dictionary knowledge rarely appeared in conjunction with any other type of cultural knowledge.
Directory knowledge did not appear to form as discrete a category as did dictionary knowledge. Directory knowledge formed the largest cultural knowledge category within this study, and there appeared to be a great deal of overlap with recipe, axiomatic, and personal axiomatic knowledge categories. Thus, in the statements describing how or with whom middle managers worked in order to 284 perform their jobs and process information, or the strategies employed, there was generally much discussion regarding the rationale or perspectives on which these actions or relationships were based.
Recipe knowledge, likewise, exhibited a great deal of overlap with directory, axiomatic and personal axiomatic knowledge. The perspective a middle manager expressed regarding what action or decision "should" occur was often accompanied by a statement describing the university’s hierarchical structure or culture, or the personal beliefs of that particular individual. Legitimation, pragmatism/efficiency, and a sales orientation were thus methods or strategies used by the middle managers to ensure that what they believed should happen actually did, in fact, occur. As for the theme of "neglect," it was apparent the middle managers believed that their thoughts, expertise or contributions to the university should not be ignored.
The axiomatic knowledge expressed by the middle managers related largely to general knowledge regarding the institution and its history or "culture." Although this appeared to be a relatively small category of knowledge in comparison to other types of knowledge, the middle managers in this study clearly held personal perspectives concerning the university and their role within the organization.
Recipe, axiomatic, and personal axiomatic knowledge are so closely related that they were initially considered the same knowledge category. Upon closer examination, however, it is possible to discern personal axiomatic knowledge from institutional axiomatic knowledge, as was shown in Table 8. 285
Table 8 also indicated that personal axiomatic knowledge was often seen in conjuction with either directory or recipe knowledge. It appears, then, that personal axiomatic knowledge, combined with normative and process knowledge, helps middle managers understand and negotiate their work lives. The various themes within personal axiomatic knowledge inform the middle managers regarding the institution itself and also their role within the university. The perceptions, assumptions or beliefs that middle managers held concerning hierarchical or interpersonal relationships within the university affected their choices regarding information sources, networking, and other related activities. Thus, Scott sees the involvement of faculty in many decisions as a product of the culture and mission of the institution; as a result, he chooses to keep faculty members informed about and involved in the activities and needs of his division. Other middle managers made decisions regarding the types or sources of information to provide based on their own interpretations of the institution’s mission, culture, and their personal perceptions of what was necessary or "best" for the university.
Personal Characteristics and Cultural Knowledge
The middle managers included in this study varied with regard to the length of time each had worked for the university. As noted previously, the information obtained through the interviews indicates that each middle manager held different 286 perspectives of the university, and each individual also revealed different combinations of cultural knowledge with regard to his or her job performance.
Jay, who had been at Midwestern the longest, had very little to say about the university’s culture. By contrast, Carrie seemed to have a great deal to say regarding the "Midwestern culture," even though she was the middle manager with the shortest tenure. One explanation for this difference is that Jay has been at
Midwestern long enough that he no longer notices or is conscious of the institution’s culture. As Masland (1985) notes, "[C]ulture is implicit, and we are all embedded in our own cultures" (p. 160). This would be in keeping with the concepts of both underlying assumptions (Ott, 1989; Schein, 1985) and axiomatic knowledge
(Sackmann, 1991, 1992). Thus, the relative lack of axiomatic knowledge or comments about Midwestern’s culture may indicate that Jay takes the underlying assumptions of the institution for granted (Schein, 1985).
At the same time, Jay made a great number of statements that were classified as recipe knowledge. He seemed to focus his comments most often on what should be done or which decisions should bemade. Perhaps, after all these years with the university, Jay is reflecting his perceptions of the various means by which
Midwestern can rectify what he perceives to be mistakes made in the past, or build on the image he has of the institution that Midwestern can (and should) become.
Meanwhile, Carrie is still learning about the institution and about
Midwestern’s values and norms. She is therefore likely to be more conscious of 287 these aspects of the university’s culture than is Jay. In addition, Carrie’s role as a development professional requires her to market the benefits of the institution as she solicits contributions. Carrie seems to have learned rather quickly that one aspect of Midwestern’s culture, the "family" image, is a very useful characteristic when soliciting funds from alumni.
Carrie also made many statements that were categorized as dictionary or directory knowledge. She appeared to focus on both of these types of knowledge more often than did the other middle managers. Again, it may be that she is very conscious of the basic duties and responsibilities of her position because of her relatively short tenure with the university. Carrie’s comments also indicate that she is still in the process of establishing relationships with other individuals, both on and off campus. It is possible that these activities are in the forefront of her thoughts regarding her job activities.
On the other hand, Scott has been with Midwestern for fourteen years and still made many comments indicating both axiomatic and dictionary knowledge.
Scott appears to be very aware of the culture, norms, and values of the institution, as well as the functions and responsibilities of other offices and individuals within the institution. This knowledge seems to be an important factor in his perception of his job activities and relationships with other constituencies.
Scott’s reliance on networking and building relationships with faculty, administrators and other constituencies may help to explain his apparent awareness 288 of many facets of Midwestern’s culture and operations. Because he is in almost constant contact with a wide variety of individuals, both on and off campus, Scott is probably more cognizant of the norms, roles, values and perceptions of these various constituencies. He feels that he must find ways to connect effectively with others, in terms of what they find important or valuable, if he is to obtain the resources or decisions needed to support his division.
The number of axiomatic responses Joyce made falls between those of Carrie and Scott. Like Carrie, Joyce has been at Midwestern for a short period of time compared to either Scott or Jay. In addition, Joyce’s role in admissions is similar to Carrie’s role in the Annual Fund office. Both of these middle managers are in daily contact with individuals outside the institution. Joyce must interpret the university to prospective students and their parents, and must also find ways to differentiate Midwestern from other colleges and universities. She therefore needs to have some knowledge of Midwestern’s culture in order to be able to communicate the unique aspects of the university to future students and their families.
Joyce also made relatively few comments that could be considered directory knowledge when compared to the other middle managers. Rather than focus on how she performs her job, Joyce seems to be more interested in discussing the personal perspective on which she bases her choices regarding job performance.
Joyce and Jay each revealed a great many statements of a personal axiomatic nature. They appear to have thought extensively about the underlying personal 289 values or rationale for their job-related decisions. This research is unable to determine whether Joyce and Jay focused on personal axiomatic knowledge due to their individual personalities, their positions within the institution, or to some other factor.
Gender and Cultural Knowledge
There were three themes in directory knowledge that were expressed solely by Carrie and Joyce. These three themes were indirect/internal process knowledge, knowledge regarding internal relationships, and internal/indirect strategies. Each of these themes might be seen as corresponding with established images of women in American culture.
For example, women are often viewed as being more concerned with relationships than are men (Gilligan, 1982; Tannen, 1990). In addition, the ways in which women comprehend and view their world often reflects what has been termed "connected knowing" (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger & Tarule, 1986).
Women tend to consider their knowledge and actions in the context of their relationships with others (Belenky et al., 1986; Gilligan, 1982).
Tannen (1990) also notes that women are often seen as being less likely to be direct in their dealings with others. The conversation of women is often intended to build consensus or solicit opinions from a wide variety of individuals, rather than to tell people directly what to do (Tannen, 1990). Thus, women may ask 290 subordinates what they think about a given situation, and use that information to frame a solution or approach with which everyone can agree (Tannen, 1990). This is very similar to the cultural knowledge displayed by Carrie as she began to reorganize the duties of her office staff. Likewise, Joyce suggests the data or information that will be useful to others without directly stating that that is the information they need for their reports or projects.
Each of the themes mentioned above relate to internal processes, relationships, or strategies. It would appear that Carrie and Joyce tended to focus their knowledge and energy on processes and relationships within their own offices more often than did Scott or Jay.
Upward Influence
One criterion used to select middle managers for this study was the lack of responsibility within the formal decision-making process of the institution. Each of the middle managers expressed varying levels of satisfaction-or dissatisfaction-with their current role, but all seem to have found avenues by which to influence the decisions made by senior administrators at Multi-Purpose Midwestern University.
When Porter, Allen & Angle (1981) studied the political behaviors of organizational members as they attempted to influence individuals in higher administrative levels, they were investigating the discretionary social influence attempts used by individuals to promote or protect their own interests. This 291 political behavior necessarily creates a zero-sum situation; in order for one person to successfully obtain more resources or promote their own interests, the resources and interests of others must suffer by comparison (Porter et al. 1981).
The behaviors identified by Porter et al. (1981) as part of the exercise of upward influence were also viewed by them as being part of a rational, orderly process. Whether individuals use political methods or strategies will depend, to some extent, on the political and social norms of the organization. If the norms of the organization are such that political behavior is condoned or encouraged, then individuals lower in the organization will "target" those whom they wish to influence. These targets will be selected based on their perceived power and their attractiveness to the political actor.
In addition, Porter et al. (1981) note that those attempting to influence upward will conduct a series of cost-benefit analyses; both expectancy theory
(Vroom, 1964; in Porter et al., 1981) and subjective expected utility theory
(Edwards, 1954, 1961; in Porter et al., 1981) are cited as forming part of the analysis on which political behaviors will be based. According to Porter et al.
(1981), then, upward influence strategies and methods will have a rational basis and will be the result of conscious evaluations of the likelihood of success.
In the present study, however, the choices and actions of the middle managers did not appear to manifest the rational, logical focus proposed by Porter et al. (1981). In addition, the middle managers in this study did not appear to be 292 attempting "political" behavior, at least not in the terms proposed by Porter et al.
(1981), as they performed their jobs. For the most part, the middle managers in this study did not view themselves as having any power or as attempting to consciously influence those in decision making positions. Rather, it appeared that
Carrie, Joyce, Scott and Jay performed their jobs-which may or may not have also meant exercising upward influence-in accordance with personal and professional axiomatic knowledge regarding what is necessary in order to do the job well.
The primary method by which the middle managers in this study seemed to exert influence was through their collection and dissemination of information to others, including decision makers. Chacko (1990) noted a similar trend in his study of academic department heads. The participants in Chacko’s (1990) study cited
"reason," meaning data and information used to support one’s position or request, as their primary method for influencing the decisions and actions of upper administrators. Other researchers (Mowday, 1978; Pettigrew, 1972; Schilit &
Locke, 1982) have also found that information transmission is an important factor in effectively exercising upward influence. As Pettigrew (1972) notes, the control and filtering of information provided to decision makers has a significant impact on the outcomes of the decision process.
Thus, it appears that the information processing activities of middle managers, including their informal relationships and networks on campus, play an important role in the ability of mid-level administrators to exercise upward 293 influence. When Joyce speaks of providing information that she feels is useful, or when Scott uses an obviously dated literature review to support his contentions regarding co-ed housing, the outcome of the decision is significantly affected.
Furthermore, it is significant that many of the decisions made by middle managers regarding information processing, networking and other strategies are based on the middle manager’s own perceptions of what is "right” or valuable to the university. For example, a middle manager may choose to withhold certain information that he or she feels may hamper the university’s fund-raising efforts.
The decision may be based in part on his or her assumptions regarding what such information would do to the university’s image or to its ability to raise sufficient contributions to finance other needed projects. The decision may also be based on whether he or she feels that the results of that information necessarily entail any changes in the operation of his or her office.
The point to be remembered, however, is that it is largely the middle manager’s responsibility, as keeper of the information, to decide how and when that information will be used. The middle manager is guided in these decisions by his or her own assumptions, beliefs, and perceptions. 294
Cultural Knowledge, Upward Influence, and Organizational Culture
The rationale for choosing both the organizational culture perspective and the cultural knowledge framework as the foundations for this study was the supposition that the perceptions middle managers have regarding the university’s culture, as expressed through their interpretation of the values and assumptions, traditions, and structure of the institution, would be apparent in the interviews. The information obtained during the course of this study appears to support this assumption.
The interpretations that middle managers expressed regarding their perspective of the university’s culture and their own cultural knowledge seemed to impact the choices made regarding work activities, including the information processing strategies used. In addition, the middle managers’ choices of upward influence strategies appeared to be related to their perceptions of the institutional culture and of their role within the university.
For example, Scott feels that Midwestern involves a large number of individuals in most institutional decisions. Furthermore, he sees the institution and upper administration as being very concerned with the welfare and education of the students. As a result, Scott establishes coalitions or networks on campus and passes information through these groups in order to impact decisions regarding student and residence life programs. Chacko (1990) similarly found that "reason" (the logical presentation of facts to support one’s position) and "coalition" (obtaining support 295 from others in the organization) were the upward influence strategies reported most often by participants in his study.
Joyce likewise establishes networks or coalitions. The purpose of her networks is different from Scott’s use of networks, however. For Joyce, networks are a means of obtaining, rather than providing, information. Joyce personally prefers quantitative data, as indicated by both recipe and personal axiomatic statements made during the interviews. In addition, the admissions profession is very numbers-oriented, as noted by several axiomatic statements Joyce made regarding her profession. Thus, Joyce creates campus networks of peers who are able to provide numerical or computer-generated data. She then filters the data and provides what she considers to be "valid" or "useful" information to her boss or to other staff members. Ultimately it appears that Joyce relies on data or "reason"
(Kipnis & Schmidt, 1982; in Chacko, 1990) to influence the decisions of others in the university.
Jay, too, appears to rely on "reason" or data in response to his perceptions of Midwestern University and its faculty. He realizes that the faculty will not necessarily be persuaded by his opinions or perceptions of assessment issues. As a consequence of his perceptions, Jay locates and provides research, reports and even texts by well-known authors on assessment in an attempt to influence faculty and administrators’ opinions regarding the need for a more comprehensive classroom assessment program. 296
Carrie, on the other hand, appears to rely more often on a combination of
"reason" and what Kipnis and Schmidt (1982; in Chacko, 1990) term "friendliness.’'
The latter is defined as "attempting to influence your manager by causing him to think well of you" (Kipnis & Schmidt, 1982; in Chacko, 1990, p. 257). Carrie can provide data about her own and other annual fund programs, when needed.
However, she appears more concerned with establishing a good relationship with her supervisor, as indicated by many directory and recipe knowledge statements. She also wants him to view her as an experienced professional in the development field.
Thus, Carrie produces elaborate plans, charts and time lines, and makes sure that her supervisor is well-informed regarding all activities within her office.
Implications for Practice and Research
In addition to addressing the initial research questions and propositions, this study identifies several avenues and topics for future research. One of the first questions raised for future study involves the relationship between what is known about an organization’s culture and how that knowledge is acquired.
In the present study, individuals within the institution were interviewed and observed extensively over a ten-month period. In addition, there were many occasions when the institution itself was observed; bulletin boards, banners, ceremonies, and other artifacts provided information about the culture of Multi-
Purpose Midwestern University. Documents such as the university catalog, the 297 institution’s self-study report, letters and mailings from the Annual Fund Office, and promotional materials of various types also presented information about the values, beliefs, and perceptions of the institution. Finally, the institution was one with which I was somewhat familiar, as I had been employed there several years prior to the start of this study. While my day-to-day knowledge of the university was outdated, I nevertheless had a context within which to examine the artifacts, beliefs, actions, and underlying assumptions of the institution.
The focus and breadth of my exposure to Midwestern differs from the methods or frameworks by which researchers such as Barley (1983), Kanter (1977),
Sackmann (1991, 1992), Schein (1985) or Van Maanen (1991) have acquired information regarding organizational culture. Barley (1983) combined extensive interviews with prolonged observations; the focus of that study was on the semiotics of funeral home operations. Kanter (1977) and Schein (1985) developed their analyses based on outside consulting experiences with various firms. Sackmann
(1991, 1992) conducted interviews with 52 different participants in her study of a multi-unit manufacturing operation. The account of the organizational culture of
Disneyland (Van Maanen, 1991) was based on the author’s experiences as a part- time employee and informal interviews and contacts with other employees after he left the organization.
Some of the studies just mentioned involved extensive observation; others included interviews with large numbers of individuals. One study (Van Maanen, 298
1991) was based on information obtained through personal work experience with that employer and informal interviews conducted at a later time. None of these other studies, however, combines the length of exposure to the site, previous knowledge gained as an employee of the institution, and extensive, in-depth interviews with participants found in the present study. In addition, the specific type of institution involved in this research is very different from the locations where other organizational culture research has occurred.
While the studies and frameworks may be suited to the specific questions addressed by each researcher, the types of information sought and the focus of the research varies widely from one study to the next. Each of the studies mentioned above seeks to understand or describe aspects of organizational culture more fully; each study likewise employs different methods and assumptions in identifying what organizational culture is and how it will be examined. As a result, these studies focus on and elaborate different types of knowledge with regard to organizational culture. Thus, a key question that future research should address in this regard is:
"How does the means by which an organization’s culture is studied impact the information and findings obtained?"
A related issue is the possibility that cultural knowledge, as defined by
Sackmann (1991, 1992) and by this study, follows a developmental process or pattern. Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) study indicated that there was little recipe or axiomatic knowledge seen among her participants; personal axiomatic knowledge 299 was not addressed. However, as noted, Sackmann’s contact with her participants was limited to one interview per person.
As shown in this research, the bulk of the cultural knowledge seen during the first round of interviews appeared in the categories of dictionary and directory knowledge (see Appendix B). Recipe, axiomatic and personal axiomatic knowledge were more pronounced during the second and third rounds of interviews. Thus, it may be that Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) study did not yield as much evidence of recipe and axiomatic knowledge because there were fewer interviews with each individual. The effect of trust and comfort levels in assessing cultural knowledge may therefore be a question for future research efforts.
Another question raised by this study with regard to Sackmann’s (1991,
1992) cultural knowledge framework is whether certain categories of cultural knowledge are easier to discuss than are others. For instance, is it easier or more comfortable for participants to talk about relatively low-level types of knowledge?
Do interviewers tend to focus their questions more on dictionary or directory types of knowledge, rather than axiomatic or personal axiomatic knowledge? In the search for rational and logical explanations regarding organizational behavior, do researchers overlook the personal attributes, values or perspectives of individual actors within the organization?
As noted in this study, a significant portion of recipe knowledge appeared as implicit statements. Would this knowledge have been apparent if the questions had 300 been different? If less time had been spent with each participant, would the implied theme in recipe knowledge have been missed altogether? Again, research design and the types of questions asked of participants are important topics for future research in this area.
In addition, the category of personal axiomatic knowledge revealed in this study appears to be an important component in the decisions middle managers make regarding their job performance. Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) study did not focus on or indicate the role of personal values even though she sought to observe "the insiders’ perspectives, their everyday theories of organizational life, and what they consider relevant in the given setting” (p. 189). The questions and issues Sackmann
(1991, 1992) addressed would seem to be conducive to a discussion of personal values, however no mention is made of the role that personal beliefs and values may have played in her participants’ responses.
It is possible that Sackmann (1991, 1992) viewed personal values as falling within the category of recipe knowledge, although this is not stated in her research.
It is also possible that Sackmann (1991, 1992) chose to view cultural knowledge, and organizational culture in general, at the aggregate level. Her discussion of
"values" was centered solely on the values of the organization (as demonstrated in axiomatic knowledge), and the values that members of a subculture shared, whether consciously or unconsciously (Sackmann, 1991, 1992). 301
Considering the issue on which Sackmann (1991, 1992) chose to focus her study-namely, innovation-it may well be that personal values were not important or germane to the discussion. The focus of the current study, however, indicates that, with regard to the choices middle managers make about their job performance, personal values form an important topic for examination and discussion.
Etzioni (1992) advances a similar position in his discussion of the role of normative-affective factors in decision making:
[N]ormative-affective factors shape to a significant extent decision making, to the extent it takes place, the information gathered, the ways it is processed, the inferences that are drawn, the options that are considered, and those that are finally chosen....[Cjognition, inference, and judgment are not logical-empirical endeavors but governed by normative-affective (noncognitive) factors, reflecting individual, psycho-dynamic.. .processes... .N/A factors determine to a considerable extent on which sources of information people draw...how they interpret what they see, and what they believe they ought to infer from what they believe they have learned about the situation (p. at 91; hand emphasis added).
It appears that middle managers in this study were using logical-empirical information based on normative-affective factors as they exercised upward influence.
The choices middle managers made regarding the information to be gathered and communicated to decision makers often included a normative-affective component, as revealed in the recipe, axiomatic, and personal axiomatic statements made during interviews. Further research on the influence of normative-affective factors in information processing choices thus seems to be warranted. 302
A fifth area for future research is the relationship between the type of organization being studied and the resulting cultural knowledge used by members of that organization. A similar suggestion was made by Satow (1975) with regard to the types of authority recognized and practiced within organizations. Satow’s
(1975) work proposes that "value-rational authority" will be more prevalent in organizations dominated by professionals. According to Satow (1975), the value- rational orientation focuses on "ideological norms rather than formal laws or rules"
(p. 527). Thus, professionals will tend to display a greater commitment to the norms or values of the profession itself rather than to the organization (Satow,
1975).
To some extent, this study shows a connection with Satow’s (1975) work: professional knowledge and communication with other professionals formed part of the cultural knowledge expressed by the middle managers. In discussing his efforts to learn more about the functions of other individuals and offices on campus, Scott indicated that these activities were common among student life professionals. If a student life staff member is to do his or her job well, according to Scott, then he or she must be interested in and aware of the operations of other offices on campus.
There would also appear to be occasions wherein one’s professional norms and the concerns of the institution coincide. The admissions field offers one example. The focus of many admissions professionals, Joyce included, is usually on the numbers or quantitative data that can be gathered regarding recruiting efforts, 303 accepted students, and the size of the incoming class. This is a subject that is generally very important to the university or college, as well. Thus, for Joyce and other admissions personnel, professional norms will probably overlap with the university’s interests and expectations.
The present study also indicates that middle managers are very concerned with questions and issues that rely on recipe, axiomatic, and personal axiomatic knowledge. Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) study, in contrast, found little emphasis on recipe or axiomatic knowledge. It may be that the environment of higher education, and the presence of many educated and professionally-oriented individuals within the institution, is more conducive to finding these categories of cultural knowledge
(Satow, 1975). The participants in Sackmann’s (1991, 1992) study were from various backgrounds; many of her participants would not be considered professionals. It is possible that middle managers in higher education have a very different outlook based on their personal characteristics and the work environment of colleges and universities. Thus, it would be useful to examine the relationship between cultural knowledge and organizational environment.
Another avenue for future study would be to focus on the processes by which middle managers acquire information regarding influence strategies and cultural knowledge. This type of study would necessitate finding new middle managers and following their progress within the institution. Over time, it may be possible to 304 ascertain and describe the processes by which different types of knowledge are acquired.
Such research would be valuable because it would enable institutions to examine the ways in which new members become acculturated and subsequently perceive the college or university. Since this study demonstrates that the perceptions and knowledge middle managers have regarding the organization can affect the decisions they make regarding information processing and upward influence strategies, it is important to gain a greater understanding of how this knowledge is obtained. Increased understanding of the manner in which middle managers "perform their tasks in support of the institution’s goals and in control of its activities" (Scott, 1978, p. 6) is vital to efforts aimed at increasing institutional and individual accountability.
Finally, future research on the topics of cultural knowledge, decision making, and middle managers within higher education should address how the type of knowledge used by a supervisor and his or her subordinates impacts the decisions and actions of individual offices within the university. For example, if a supervisor focuses on axiomatic knowledge while his or her subordinates rely on directory knowledge, how might these different knowledge bases affect the functioning of the office?
Furthermore, how can a supervisor who tends to think in terms of the "big picture" evaluate the work of a subordinate who thinks in terms of process 305 knowledge? Similarly, how can a subordinate who depends on dictionary or directory knowledge fully understand or appreciate the perspective and expectations of a supervisor who relies on personal axiomatic knowledge? In short, how do the different types and combinations of cultural knowledge used by individuals within the organization influence their ability to work together effectively? These questions point to many important issues for future research regarding the role and impact of cultural knowledge on organizational behavior.
Summary
Given the expansion of the middle management ranks within modern
American colleges and universities, it is important to gain greater understanding of how individuals in these positions function. The data presented in this study indicate that both an organizational culture perspective and attention to cultural knowledge are important factors in understanding the job performance and upward influence activities of middle managers.
By examining the perceptions and beliefs of middle managers, as revealed in their statements, actions, and written materials, it is possible to more fully understand how and why middle managers choose to focus on particular types of information and related processing activities. The cultural knowledge of middle managers, including knowledge of a personal axiomatic nature, is thus an important 306 means of understanding their perceptions, beliefs, assumptions and activities as these affect the exercise of upward influence in the institution. APPENDIX A
Interview Questions
The questions appearing in this Appendix are those that were developed prior to each interview session. Since the interviews often flowed more like conversations, especially in the second and third rounds, it would be impossible to list all of the questions that were asked without providing a complete transcript of each interview.
First Round- Middle Managers
Middle managers were asked to respond to the same basic questions during Round
One:
What is your job title?
How long have you been in this position?
Can you give me a thumbnail sketch of your responsibilities?
Is there someone or some group to whom you report? Who might that be, and what is their role (and title) in the institution?
Where were you before you came to Midwestern? What did you do there?
How long have you been in higher education administration (total)?
When did you decide to enter higher education administration? Why?
What influenced your decision to take an administrative position here at
307 308
Midwestern?
What did you know about Midwestern before you came here? Is this pretty much the same image you have of Midwestern now, or has it changed since you began working here?
In general, what would you say is the thing you like best about college administration? If there was one thing that you could change about college administration in general, what would that be?
Second Round-Middle Managers
During the second round of interviews, several of the questions were the same for each middle manager. The responses to these questions varied widely, and resulted in very different follow-up questions being asked of each middle manager. In order to list each question asked, it would be necessary to reproduce the entire interview transcript from each interview. Thus, only the questions posed to all four middle managers are shown below.
What role do you as a middle manager play in supplying information, feedback, and validation for the ideas of decision makers?
What role could you play in supplying information, etc.? (i.e., are there things you aren’t doing now that you could be doing? What would these things be?)
What role should middle managers play in supplying information, etc.?
To what extent are you involved in decision making in your job?
How would you characterize the decisions you make or are involved in making?
How do these decisions come about?
Would you like to see a different role for yourself in decision making than 309
the one you currently have?
Are you involved in decisions that are not part of the day-to-day routine? (If so, how?)
Can you describe a project in which you were involved in helping your boss with a major decision?
What is your perception of time in the decision-making process?
Does your perspective of time affect your activities (gathering information, making decisions, etc.)?
Does your perception of this time frame affect how you view your job?
What impact, if any, does time have on job activities related to decisions?
How do you evaluate yourself in this position? How do you think your supervisor evaluates you?
Third Round-Middle Managers
A basic series of questions was developed for all middle managers, with some specific questions for certain middle managers. Again, due to the wide variety of responses and topics discussed during the interviews, it is not possible to provide a complete list of interview questions without printing a transcript for each interview.
The basic questions are listed first:
How do you evaluate yourself in this position? How do you think your supervisor evaluates you?
How would you describe the environment of your office? Does your perception of the environment affect the way you do your job? 310
Is there a role for creativity in how you do your job? Do you think that creativity is important in accomplishing what you need to do? How creative can you be in this position?
How much do you consider the role of other stakeholders when you process information or perform other aspects of your job? how often do you wonder about or concern yourself with how other offices or constituencies will view what you do? Whose opinions matter? What effect-if any-does this have on how you perform your job?
Do you see any role for gender in your job position?
What would be a good pseudonym for Midwestern? Why?
Questions for Carrie:
In your experience, how do other Annual Fund/Development professionals work?
How do you see yourself getting things done? Is there a particular strategy that you see yourself using more often?
Would you say you focus more on people who are internal to this office, or to those who are external? What is your perception of the role of external stakeholders in how you do your job?
Have you observed any changes in your work or management style since your supervisor was named permanent VP? If so, what are these changes and why do you think they have come about?
Would you say you tend operate more directly or more indirectly?
It seems there is an element of defensiveness in some of your choices regarding how to get your work done. Is that an accurate statement? Why or why not? 311
Questions for Jay:
What happened at the faculty retreat?
How were faculty chosen to work on the retreat structure-what criteria were used?
How did you decide that Cross & Angello’s book was the best one to use on the topic of assessment?
What are the similarities between Midwestern and Alverno College? What other institutions have similar assessment programs?
Does the concept of TQM fit into your ideas about assessment?
Do you feel the need to anticipate or rationalize your supervisor’s decisions? [How] can you do this?
What is the basis for institutional decisions at Midwestern? What is the bottom-line, bedrock on which decisions are made?
Questions for Joyce:
Do you have any kind of vested interest in the information you provide to your supervisor or to others?
Do you tend to rely on certain types of information because you can access this information more easily?
Who generally has the most control over the data you use?
Questions for Scott:
What is your definition of "Machiavellian"? Of "politics"?
How would you describe yourself in this position?
What is your definition or perspective of conflict? Is conflict generally good or bad, in your opinion? 312
Do you feel the need to try to anticipate or rationalize your supervisor’s decisions? [How] can you do this?
Questions for Decision Makers:
Following are the prepared questions for decision makers. As with middle managers, the interviews often seemed more like conversations. In addition, the information and topics discussed varied widely according to the decision maker being interviewed. Thus, each question that was asked of each middle manager does not appear in this list.
What is your current position title?
How long have you been with Midwestern? How long have you been in your current position? Can you give me a brief description of your position?
What is the decision-making process at Midwestern? How are you involved in this process?
Do you involve middle managers in the decisions that you need to make? If so, how does that come about?
What kinds of reports or information do you find useful when you are working on an issue that affects the institution as a whole? Why? How is that information used?
How do you evaluate the information you obtain from middle managers? Are there certain types of information that you find more persuasive? Are your middle managers aware of this preference? Does that affect the types of information they provide to you?
On what basis would you say most decisions are made at Midwestern? What is the underlying foundation for decisions? How are institutional decisions evaluated? 313
What happens when information you obtain from one source conflicts with the information obtained from another source?
What do you see as the biggest issues or problems facing Midwestern right now? What are its greatest strengths?
What is the environment facing your office right now?
If you needed to describe Midwestern to a stranger, what would you say? APPENDIX B
Table 11. Cultural Knowledge Groupings of Middle Managers by Interview
Interview Axiom- Name Number Dictionary Directory Recipe Axiomatic Own
Jay 1 7 22 11 2 6
2 10 12 19 0 9
3 1 15 20 2 27
Scott 1 9 7 0 4 7
2 6 22 18 24 7
3 0 13 20 16 9
Joyce 1 11 8 5 1 17
2 4 21 7 3 16
3 0 7 14 7 12
Carrie 1 16 33 15 5 12
2 10 39 5 1 7
3 0 7 11 0 0
Totals 74 206 145 65 129
314 REFERENCES
American Association of University Administrators. (1988). Professional standards for administrators in higher education. Journal for Higher Education Management. 3 (2), 3-6.
American Association of University Professors. (1990). Policy Documents and Reports (1990 ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., & Razavieh, A. (1990). Introduction to research in education. Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Austin, A.E. (1985). Factors contributing to iob satisfaction of university mid-level administrators. Paper presented at the annual meeting for the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 259 626)
Austin, A.E. (1984, Fall). The work experience of university and college administrators. Administrator’s Update. 6 (1), 1-6. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 259 690)
Austin, A.E., & Gamson, Z.F. (1983). Academic workplaces: New demands, heightened tensions. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Research Report No. 10). Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education.
Barley, S.R., Meyer, G.W., & Gash, D.C. (1988). Cultures of culture: Academics, practitioners and the pragmatics of normative control. Administrative Science Quarterly. 33, 24-60.
Beach, J.A. (1985). The management and governance of academic institutions. The Journal of College and University Law. 12 (3), 301-342.
Belenky, M.F., Clinchy, B.M., Goldberger, N.R., & Tarule, J.M. (1986). Women’s wavs of knowing: The development of self, voice and mind. New York: Basic Books.
315 316
Benson, J.K. (1983). A dialectical method for the study of organizations. In G. Morgan (Ed.), Bevond method (pp. 321-330). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Berger, P.L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. New York: Anchor Books.
Bess, J.L., & Lodahl, T.M. (1969). Career patterns and satisfactions in university middle-management. Educational Record. 50 (2), 220-229.
Bledstein, B.J. (1976). The culture of professionalism. New York: W.W. Norton.
Blyn, M.R., & Zoemer, C.E., Jr. (1982, March). The academic string pushers. Change, pp. 21-25.
Bogdan, R.C., & Biklen, S.K. (1982). Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Burrell, G., & Morgan, G. (1979). Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books.
Callahan, R.E. (1962). Education and the cult of efficiency. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Chacko, H.E. (1990). Methods of upward influence, motivational needs, and administrators’ perceptions of their supervisors’ leadership styles. Group and Organization Studies. 15 (3), 253-265.
Chaffee, E.E., and Tierney, W.G. (1988). Collegiate culture and leadership strategies. New York: Macmillan.
Cohen, M.D., & March, J.G. (1986). Leadership and ambiguity (2nd ed.). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Conrad, C.F. (1982). Grounded theory: An alternative approach to research in higher education. Review of Higher Education. 5 (4), 239-249.
Corson, J.J. (1975). The governance of colleges and universities (rev. ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dill, D.D. (1982). The management of academic culturer Notes on the management of meaning and social integration. Higher Education. 11, 303-320. 317
Donmoyer, R. (1985). Cognitive anthropology and research on effective principals. Educational Administration Quarterly. 21 ((2), 31-57.
Downs, A. (1967) Inside bureaucracy. Boston: Little, Brown.
Eble, K.E. (1978). The art of administration. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Etzioni, A. (1992). Normative-affective factors: Toward a new decision-making model. In M. Zey (Ed.), Decision making: Alternatives to rational choice models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Fetterman, D.M. (1990). Ethnographic auditing: A new approach to evaluating management. New Directions for Institutional Research. 68, 19-34.
Fetterman, D.M. (1989). Ethnography step bv step. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Freeman, P.W., & Roney, R.K. (1978). The neglected majority: Non-faculty employees in higher education. Journal of the College and University Personnel Association. 29, 21-29.
Gabarro, J.J., & Kotler, J.P. (1980). Managing your boss. Harvard Business Review. 58, 92-100.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Glenny, L.A. (1972). The anonymous leaders of higher education. Journal of Higher Education. Vol. XLIII (1), 9-22.
Grassmuck, K. (1991, August 14). Throughout the 80’ s, colleges hired more non teaching staff than other employees. Chronicle of Higher Education, p. A22.
Hohenstein, W.V., & Williams, B.J. (1974). The forgotten man: The non-faculty non-classified university employee. Journal of the College and University Personnel Association. 25 (4), 21-33.
Ivancevich, J.M., & Glueck, W.F. (1989). Foundations of personnel (4th ed.). Homewood, IL: BP Irwin. 318
Jelinek, M., Smircich, L., & Hirsch, P. (1983). Introduction: A code of many colors. Administrative Science Quarterly. 28, 331-338.
Judd, C.M., Smith, E.R., & Kidder, L.H. (1991). Research methods in social relations (6th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Kanter, R.M. (1977) Men and women of the corporation. New York: Basic Books.
Kaufman, H. (1981). The administrative behavior of federal bureau chiefs. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Kemerer, F.R., & Baldridge, J.V. (1976). The impact of faculty collective bargaining on campus administrators. Stanford, CA: Stanford Project on Academic Governance. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 138126)
Kipnis, D., Schmidt, S.M., Swaffin-Smith, C., & Wilkinson, I. (1984). Patterns of managerial influence: Shotgun managers, tacticians, and bystanders. Organizational Dynamics. 12 (3), 58-67.
Kuh, G.D., & Whitt, E.J. (1988). The invisible tapestry: Culture in American colleges and universities. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1). Washington, D.C.: Association for the Study of Higher Education.
Kvale, S. (1983). The qualitative research interview: A phenomological and a hermeneutical mode of understanding. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology. 14 ( ), 171-196.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Litchfield, E.H. (1971). Organization in large American universities: The administration. In J.V. Baldridge (Ed.), Academic governance: Research on institutional politics and decision making. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
McClintock, C. (1985). Process sampling: A method for case study research on administrative behavior. Educational Administration Quarterly. 21 (3), 205- 222.
Masland, A.T. (1985). Organizational culture in the study of higher education. Review of Higher Education. 8 (2), 157-168. 319
Montgomery, J.R. (1990). Leadership in middle administration. Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the Association off Institutional Research. Louisville, KY. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 321 680)
Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Mowday, R.T. (1978). The exercise of upward influence in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly. 23, 137-156.
Myers, I.B. (1980). Gifts differing. Palo Alto,CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Myers, I.B. (1962). The Mvers-Briggs type indicator. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Nicklin, J.L., & Blumenstyk, G. (1993, January 6). Number of non-teaching staff members continues to grow in higher education. The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. A43, A46.
Ott, J.S. (1989). The organizational culture perspective. Chicago: The Dorsey Press.
Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Peterson, M.W., & Spencer, M.G. (1990). Understanding academic culture and climate. New Directions for Institutional Research. 68, 3-18.
Peterson, M.W. (1985). Emerging developments in postsecondary organization theory and research: Fragmentation or integration. Educational Researcher. 14 (3), 5-12.
Pettigrew, A.M. (1979). On studying organizational cultures. Administrative Science Quarterly. 24 (1), 570-581.
Plante, P.R. (1990). Myths and realities of academic administration. New York: Macmillan.
Porter, L.W., Allen, R.W., & Angle, H.L. (1981). The politics of upward influence in organizations. In L.L. Cummings & B.M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 3, pp. 109-150). Greenwich, CT: JAI. 320
Reyes, P., & Smith, G. (1987, February). Faculty and academic staff participation in academic governance: The social contract model. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. San Diego, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 281 446)
Rudolph, F. (1962). The American college and university. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.
Sackmann, S. A. (1992). Culture and subcultures: An analysis of organizational knowledge. Administrative Science Quarterly. 37 (1), 140-161.
Sackmann, S.A. (1991). Cultural knowledge in organizations: Exploring the collective mind. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Sagaria, M.A. (1986, February). Head counting, hill climbing, ahd beyond: The status and future directions for research on mid-level administrators’ careers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. San Antonio, TX. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 268 891)
Sanday, P.R. (1979). The ethnographic paradigm(s). Administrative Science Quarterly. 24. 527-538.
Satow, R.L. (1975). Value-rational authority and professional organizations: Weber’s missing type. Administrative Science Quarterly. 20, 526-531.
Schein, E.H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schein, E.H. (1981). Does Japanese management style have a message for American managers? Sloan Management Review. 23 (1), 55-68.
Schilit, W.K., & Locke, E.A. (1982). A study of upward influence in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly. 27, 304-316.
Schmidtlein, F.A. (1987). Administrative structures and decision-making processes. In M.W. Peterson and L.A. Mets (Eds.), Key resources on higher education, governance, management, and leadership (pp. 139-162). San Franciso: Jossey-Bass.
Scott, R.A. (1979). Beleagured yeomen: Comments on the conditions of collegiate middle managers. College and University. 54 (2), 89-95. 321
Scott, R.A. (1978). Lords, squires, and veomen: Collegiate middle managers and their organizations. Washington, D.C.: American Association for Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 165 641)
Seidman, I.E. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative research. New York: Teachers College Press.
Singleton, B.S. (1987). Sources and consequences of role conflict and role ambiguity among department chairs. Capstone Journal of Education. 7 (2), 39- 50.
Smircich, L. (1983a). Concepts of culture and organizational analysis. Administrative Science Quarterly. 28, 339-358.
Smircich, L. (1983b). Studying organizations as cultures. In G. Morgan (Ed.), Bevond method (pp. 160-172). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Stroup, H. (1966). Bureaucracy in higher education. New York: Free Press.
Sutherland, E. (1972). Nonacademic personnel and university governance. Journal of the College and University Personnel Association. 24(1), 11-49.
Sutherland, E. (1973). Nonacademic personnel and university governance. Journal of the College and University Personnel Association. 24 (3), 60-84.
Tannen, D. (1990). You iust don’t understand. New York: Ballantine.
Tierney, W.G. (1991). Academic work and institutional culture: Constructing knowledge. Review of Higher Education. 14 (2), 199-216.
Tierney, W.G. (1988). Organizational culture in higher education. Journal of Higher Education. 59 (1), 2-21.
Van Maanen, J. (1991). The smile factory. In P.J. Frost, L.F. Moore, M.R. Louis, C.C. Lundberg, & J. Martin (Eds.), Reframing organizational culture (pp. 58-76). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Veysey, L.R. (1965). The emergence of the American university. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Whetten, D.A., & Cameron, K.S. (1985). Administrative effectiveness in higher education. Review of Higher Education. 9 (1), 35-49. 322
Wolcott, H.F. (1985). On ethnographic intent. Educational Administration Quarterly. 21 (3), 187-203.
Yin, R.K. (1989). Case study research (rev. ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.