Dimensions and domains of organisational effectiveness in Australian higher education

Abstract

Research in US higher educational institutions over more than a decade has produced dimensions defining aspects of inputs, processes and outcomes which are important for organisational effectiveness (OE) (Cameron, 1978). Furthermore, these dimensions have been shown to vary systematically to define the domain of each type of institution (e.g., ivy league versus regional college). A significant step in the process of exploring various relationships impacting on effectiveness in Australian higher education would be to derive a classification along the fines of Cameron's work. This paper first reviews research in Australian higher education testing Cameron's dimensions and exploring aspects of organisational climate which appear to represent equally important dimensions of organisational effectiveness Ryder, 1988, 1989).This study then undertakes a combined analysis of Cameron and of Jones and James (1979) variables to identify a more comprehensive set of dimensions. Discriminant procedures successfully predict and further define the single taxonomy suggested by the previous work involving organisational climate only (Lysons, 1990). Finally, the implications of these findings with particular regard to very recent structural adjustments in the higher education system are discussed including reference to further OE research directions undertaken in this ongoing program. Organisational research in higher educationArguably, one of the most significant contributions in the study of organisational effectiveness in higher education was the work of Cameron (1978). His approach was to empirically identify dimensions of OE involving aspects of student, staff and organisational issues. His nine dimensions involve student (1) academic (2) career, and (3) personal development, and (4) satisfaction; staff(5) professional development and quality, and (6) satisfaction; and the organisation's (7) health, (8) openness in the community, and (9) ability to acquire resources (see also Lysons and Ryder, 1988, p. 324). Ultimately, Cameron (1981) was able to demonstrate how these dimensions systematically classified various categories of institutions (e.g., Ivy league, State funded universities, institutes of technology, regional colleges, etc.) by defining their different domains of activity (e.g., elite high morale, elite low morale, external oriented and mediocre types of organisations, respectively).This was an important development because the taxonomy portrayed the truly complex mosaic of the higher education system in the US at that time. It illustrated the multivariate and multi-dimensional nature of organisational effectiveness in higher education while confirming the generally held intuitive view of the system's structure. Significantly, Cameron went on to use this model as the basis for institutional research to assist management decision making and in further related

Diversity in Australian higher education?

“…The theoretical basis of this study is first, that the dimensions proven to be reliable through replication (Lysons, 1993) demonstrate consistent discriminant validity in terms of the four groups hypothesised (Lysons, 1990b). Secondly, that the nature of these dimensions, their discriminant functions and the intuitive meaningfulness of the groupings strongly suggest quite distinctive organisational cultures (Lysons, 1990b).…”

“…This article explores the relationships between these data on transitional management issues and the management effectiveness taxonomy derived from survey research prior to the demise of the binary system and the recent amalgamations (Lysons, 1990b;1993), and draws some tentative conclusions regarding the further development of the Australian higher education system with respect to the roles of the former CAEs and the established universities.…”

“…Further to the binary distinction between universities and CAEs, an important research finding concerning Australian higher education prior to the Dawkins reforms was that the system consisted of four discrete groups each servicing separate domains (Lysons, 1990b). The organisational effectiveness (OE) taxonomy which emerged from this research program highlighted the differences in 'academic' and 'student drawing power' orientations existing in the system during the 1980s.…”

“…This study explores systematic relationships between management attitudes about recent transitions in the funding and structure of higher education in Australia (Meek and Goedegebuure, 1989) and the domains of the taxonomy emerging from ongoing organisational effectiveness research based on these institutions (Lysons, 1990b). The results reinforce the integrity of the previously established 4 group framework and flesh-out more fine-grained issues which may militate against the smooth transition of amalgamated institutions to university status, on the one hand, and the enhancement of diversity on the other.…”

Attaining a Sustainable Future for Public Higher Education: The Role of Institutional Effectiveness and Resource Dependence

“…Lysons (1990), and Lysons and Hatherly (1992) have tested this construct in Australian and United Kingdom context respectively. While findings in Australian context support only four of Cameron's nine dimensions, findings in the U.K. setting show much higher level of reliability for the nine dimensions studied.…”