Barriers to effective quality management and leadership. Case study of two academic departments.

Autor/in	Newton, Jethro
Titel	Barriers to effective quality management and leadership. Case study of two academic departments. Gefälligkeitsübersetzung: Hindernisse für effektives Qualitätsmanagement und Führungsqualität. Eine Fallstudie in zwei wissenschaftlichen Fachbereichen.
Quelle	In: Higher education, 44 (2002) 2, S. 185-212Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Link als defekt meldenVerfügbarkeit
Beigaben	Literaturangaben 54
Sprache	englisch; englische Zusammenfassung
Dokumenttyp	online; gedruckt; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0018-1560; 1573-174X
DOI	10.1023/A:1016385207071
Schlagwörter	Forschung; Einstellung (Psy); Bildungsmanagement; Qualitätsmanagement; Karriere; Hochschulleitung; Hochschulverwaltung; Wissenschaftliche Kommunikation; Wissenschaftsfreiheit; Akademische Freiheit; Hochschule; Diskussion; Einflussfaktor; Führungskompetenz; Kollegialitätsprinzip; Kooperation; Qualitätssicherung; Forschungspersonal; Wissenschaftler; Ausland; Großbritannien
Abstract	This paper reports results of "insider research" at a UK college of higher education (NewColl). In drawing on a "ground-level" approach, and building on earlier work, it provides insights into "front-line'" academics views and perspectives on organisational change and the implementation of quality policy, and points to challenges for institutional leadership. The paper begins by considering the impact of the quality revolution on the academic community and its relationships, and then looks at how policy implementation, leadership, and the management of change can be conceptualised. The case study element consists of profiles of two academic departments which, in the main body of the research, displayed markedly more negative responses to organisational change and the implementation of revised quality assurance arrangements than other academic units. Drawing on interview data which provide "thick description", a set of explanatory concepts is presented which help to explain why the two schools show themselves to be divergent in comparison with others. These concepts centre on issues around "psychological contracts"; leadership, communication and the management of change; collegialism and professional accountability; and reciprocal accountability and mutual trust. The paper goes on to consider the importance of "the discretion debate" and proposes that, by stressing "ownership", "professional autonomy", and "self-assessment", quality assurance systems and quality management in higher education run the risk of exposing or exacerbating the "problem" of discretion for institutional managers and leaders. The paper concludes by identifying a number of lessons which can be drawn from the case study for quality managers and academic administrators. (HRK/text adopted).
Erfasst von	Institut für Hochschulforschung (HoF) an der Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg; Hochschulrektorenkonferenz, Bonn
Update	2004_(CD)