Decision-making in multi-campus higher education institutions

Community College Enterprise, The, Fall 2004 by Timberlake, Gregory R

The author investigated decision-making in multi-campus higher education environments via separate interviews with eight professionals asked to describe relevant experiences, The results point to leadership, participation, autonomy/ centralization and structure as important factors in understanding decision-making in such environments. Evidence indicates that autonomy and centralization are often opposing forces, and organizational success may be enhanced by balancing them through the effective use of participation.

Introduction

The author took a qualitative approach to investigating the topic of decision-making in multi-campus higher education institutions. He asked an essential question of the eight interviewees: What have you experienced around decision-making in multi-campus institutions? The question is relevant because a number of such institutions currently exist and multicampus organizations will become more common as institutions merge to gain efficiency made possible by new technologies.

Background Concepts

Decision-making

Many theorists attempt to understand the mechanics of individual decisions or evaluate their effectiveness as single discrete determinations. Garvin and Roberto (2001) recognize decisions as processes occurring over time and across cultures. Not only should one resist viewing decisions as single events, it is also helpful to distinguish between strategic decision-making and operational decision-making. Strategic decision-making defines purpose and operational decision-making implements purpose (Simon 1976).

Rausch, Halfhill, Sherman, and Washbush (2001), noting several elements to be considered during decision-making processes, emphasize the use of appropriate participation. They also claim that as society moves further from the industrial era competence is less likely to depend on functional competence and more likely to depend on relationship skills (Rausch et al, 2001). Morgan (2003), Wheatley (2003) and Schein (1992) point out that organizational success is more dependent now on relationship skills than it has been in the past.

Womack and Podemski (1985) have reviewed state supported multi-campus systems and outline the importance of equal participation in planning processes from each campus in a multi-campus system. They further state that each campus in a system should base mission and goals, at least to some degree, on the needs of the individual communities served. Finally, they recommended that different campuses excel in ways that fit their particular environments. Vroom (2000) writes:

Under a wide range of conditions, increasing participation leads to greater 'buy-in,' commitment to decisions, and motivation to implement them effectively (p. 85).

While there is broad support for participation in decision-making, there are also perceived problems including reduced decision-making speed (Daft & Marcic, 2001) and the dangers of groupthink (Janis, 1972). Eisenhardt (1999), on the other hand, believes a cohesive group with the ability to consider multiple viewpoints and the ability to resolve conflict has the potential to develop group intuition. She posits such intuition as an element in successful leadership teams, one which may allow a group to move through decision-making processes more quickly.

Structure including alignment

Decision-making significantly influences organizational structure. A highly differentiated organization is likely to be more controlling and hierarchical and often less innovative (Dougherty, 2001). A highly integrated organization is likely to respond more quickly, be innovative and yet may have problems with control (Dougherty, 2001). Nadler and Tushman (1999) describe the ideal in organizational design as the capacity to seek both integration and differentiation with the ability to link units across functions in the organization.

Leadership

Leadership emerged as a common factor in the interviewees' experience. Eisenhardt (1999) writes that traditional models and understanding of decision-making place too much confidence in the ability of executives to analyze an organization and its environment. She also states that strategic decision-making should not be isolated at the top of an organization. Distributing strategic decision-making allows people at all levels to make appropriate decisions aligned with one another (Worley, Hitchin &L Ross, 1996).

Clearly, leaders are instrumental in maintaining or changing the cultures of their organizations (Schein, 1992 and Massarik and Pei-Carpenter, 2002). In the end, situational leadership becomes a prerequisite of an effective leader (Rowe &. Mason, 1987 and Schein, 1992), because a good leader will adapt his or her style to the situation or person at hand, regardless-or in spite of-style preference (Rowe & Mason, 1987).

Key leadership components that emerge in a literature review include the following: 1) the importance of relationship building skills (Wheatley, 2003; Morgan, 2003; and Schein, 1992), 2) the ability to manage participatory decision-making and its relational aspects (Womack & Podemski, 1985; Eishenhardt, 1999; and Schein, 1992), and 3) the ability to manage paradoxes (Smith & Berg, 1987) or polarities (Johnson, 1992). The later point became important in the research as participants discussed the damage done by ongoing, unresolved conflict between those who sought autonomy in a multi-campus system and those who sought centralization. Methodology