Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predicting a taxonomy of organisational effectiveness in U.K. higher educational institutions

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Major developments in organisational theory have witnessed the emergence of several models of organisational effectiveness (OE) and change (Keeley 1978; Hannan & Freeman 1977; Miles & Cameron 1982). The integrative competing values framework suggests organisations adopt uniquely effective approaches reflecting their needs at different stages in their life cycle by addressing varying degrees of emphasis on systems resource, human relations, internal process, and rational goal orientations (Cameron & Whetten 1981; Quinn & Rohrbaugh 1983; Quinn & Cameron 1983). This coincided with, and complemented, the growing recognition of the importance of developing systematic means for organisational speciation (McKelvey 1975, 1982; Muchinsky & Morrow 1980) and using the resulting taxonomies emerging from these studies to underpin theory building and further research.

The ongoing challenge of this era is, therefore, to continue to test and extend construct space and explore organisational typologies in line with these theoretical and empirical developments in order to provide practical utility for decision makers. Indeed, this was the impetus for large scale OE research programs involving higher educational institutions in both Australia and the U.K.

This paper first briefly reviews highlights of the developments emerging from the Australian programs over a number of years. Framed in this context, the paper then summarises the study program in the U.K. aimed at further cross-cultural exploration of OE dimensions. Of particular interest was their usefulness in predicting and fleshing out a taxonomy of U.K. higher educational institutions, namely classical (red brick) universities, former polytechnics and colleges of advanced technology, and 60's greenfield universities.

The results reinforced life cycle and resource dependency theory underpinning the competing values framework based explanations for inherent and systematic differences between these archetypes (Quinn & Rohrbaugh 1983; Lysons 1993). However, further research directions are also suggested.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldrich, H.E. (1979). Organizations and Environments. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnard, C.I (1938). The Functions of the Executive, Harvard University Press.

  • Bigelow, J.D. (1980). ‘Evolution and middle range theories: Toward a matrix of organisational modes’, in Pinder, C.C. and Moore, L.F. (eds.), Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, pp. 157–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K.S. (1981). ‘Domains of organisational effectiveness in colleges and universities’, Academy of Management Journal 24(1): 25–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K.S. (1986). ‘A study of organisational effectiveness and its predictors’, Management Science 32: 87–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K.S. and Whetten, D.A. (1981). ‘Perceptions of organisational effectiveness over organisational life cycles’, Administrative Science Quarterly 26: 525–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D.T. (1969). ‘Variation and selective retention in socio-cultural evolution’, General Systems 14: 69–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. (1977). ‘On the Nature of Organisational Effectiveness’, in Goodman, P.S. and Pennings, J.M. (eds.), New Perspectives on Organisational Effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Committee of Vice Chancellors and Principals, ‘Report of the Steering Committee for Efficiency Studies in Universities’ (The ‘Jarratt Report’), March 1985.

  • Cooper, R.B. and Quinn, R.E. (1993). ‘Implications of the competing values framework for management information systems’, Human Resource Management 32(1): 175–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, L.L., (1983). ‘Organisational effectiveness and organisational behaviour: A critical perspective’, in Cameron, K.S. and Whetten, D.A. (eds.), Organisational Effectiveness: A Comparison of Multiple Models. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curtis, S.J. (1963). History of Education in Great Britain (5th edition), University Tutorial Press.

  • Etzioni, A. (1964). Modern Organizations, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzioni, A. (1975). A Comparative Analysis of Complex Organizations, second edition. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goedegebuure, L.C.J., Lysons, A.F. and Meek, V.L. (1993). ‘Diversity in Australian Higher Education’, Higher Education, The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning 25(4): 395–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P.S., Atkin, R.S., and Schoorman, F.D. (1983). ‘On the Demise of Organisational Effectiveness Studies’, in Cameron, K.S. and Whetten, D.A. (eds.), Organisational Effectiveness: A Comparison of Multiple Models, New York: Academic Press, pp. 163–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, E. and Gambsch, P.V. (1968). University Goals and Academic Power. Washington D.C.: American Council on Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, E. and Gambsch, P.V. (1974). Changes in University Organizations, 1964–1971, A Report for the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M.T. and Freeman, J. (1977). ‘The population ecology of organizations’, American Journal of Sociology 82: 929–964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karmel, P. (1989). Reflections on a revolution: Australian Higher Education in 1989, AVCC Papers 1, Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee.

  • Keeley, M. (1978). ‘A social justice approach to organisational evaluation’, Administrative Science Quarterly 22: 272–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A.F. (1990a). ‘Taxonomies of higher educational institutions predicted from organization climate’, Research in Higher Education, Journal of the Association for Institutional Research 31(2): 115–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A.F. (1990b). ‘Dimensions and domains of organisational effectiveness in Australian higher education’, Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning 20(3): 287–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A.F. (1993). ‘The typology of organisational effectiveness in Australian higher education’, Research in Higher Education, Journal of the Association for Institutional Research 34(4): 465–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A.F. and Hatherly, D.J. (1992). ‘Cameron's dimensions of effectiveness in higher education in the U.K.: A cross-cultural comparison’, Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning 23(3): 221–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A.F. and Ryder, P.A. (1988). ‘An empirical test of Cameron's dimensions of effectiveness: Implications for Australian tertiary institutions’, Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Educational Planning 17(3): 323–332.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A.F. and Ryder, P.A. (1989). ‘An application of Jones & James' perceived climate questionnaire in Australian higher educational institutions’, Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Educational Planning 18(6): 697–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, B. (1975). ‘Guidelines for the empirical classification of organizations’ Administrative Science Quarterly 20: 509–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, B. (1977). Organisational Systematics, Graduate School of Management, UCLA.

  • McKelvey, B. (1978). ‘Organisational systematics: Taxonomic lessons from biology’, Management Science 24: 1428–1440.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, B. (1980). ‘Organisational speciation’, in Pinder, C.C. and Moore, L.F. (eds.), Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, B. (1982). Organisational Systematics, University of California Press.

  • Miles, R.H. (1980). Macro-Organisational Behaviour, Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R.H. and Cameron, K.S. (1982). Coffin Nails and Corporate Strategies, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muchinsky, P.M. and P.C. Morrow (1980). ‘The applicability of middle range theories to the study of organisational effectiveness’, in Pinder, C.C. and Moore, L.F. (eds.), Middle Range Theory and the Study of Organizations, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, pp. 304–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pace, C.R. (1976). ‘Institutional instruments for standardised assessment’, in Peterson, M.W. (ed.), Benefiting from Interinstitutional Research, New Directions for Institutional Research, No. 12, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pace, C.R. (1979). Measuring Outcomes of College. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R.E. (1970). The Crisis of Purpose: Definition and Uses of Institutional Goals, Report No. 5, prepared for the ERIC Clearing House on Higher Education, Washington, D.C.

  • Peterson, R.E. (1971). Toward Institutional Goal-Consciousness, 1971 Western Regional Conference on Testing Problems. Princeton, N.J.: Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. (1960). Structure and Process in Modern Societies, New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1977). ‘Usefulness of the concept’, in Goodman, P.S. and Pennings, J.M. (eds.), New Perspectives in Organisational Effectiveness, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 132–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, J.L. (1968). Organisational Effectiveness: An Inventory of Propositions, Homewood, Illinois: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, J.L. (1972). ‘The study of organisational effectiveness’, Sociological Quarterly 12: 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R.E. (1988). Beyond Rational Management: Mastering the Paradoxes and Competing Demands of High Performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R.E. and Cameron, K.S. (1983). ‘Organisational life cycles and shifting criteria of effectiveness: Some preliminary evidence’, Management Science 29(1): 33–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R.E., Faerman, S.R., Thompson, M.P. and McGrath, M.R. (1990). Becoming A Master Manager: A Competency Framework. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, R.E. and Rohrbaugh, J. (1983). ‘A spatial model of effectiveness criteria: Toward a competing values approach to organisational analysis’, Management Science 29(3): 363–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romney, L. (1978). Measures of Institutional Goal Achievement. Boulder, Col.: National Centre for High Education Management Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W.R. (1977). ‘Effectiveness of organisational effectiveness studies’, in Goodman, P.S. and Pennings, J.M. (eds.), New Perspectives on Organisational Effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 63–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whetten, D.A. and Cameron, K.S. (1984). Developing Management Skills. Glenview, Ill.: Scott, Forseman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuchtman, E. and Seashore, S.E. (1967). ‘A system resource approach of organisational effectiveness’, American Sociological Review 32: 891–903.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zammuto, R.F. (1982). Assessing Organisational Effectiveness, Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, James Cook University, 4811, Qld., Australia

    Art Lysons (Associate Professor)

  2. University of Edinburgh, Scotland

    David Hatherly (Professor and Head of Department of Accounting and Business Method)

Authors
  1. Art Lysons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Hatherly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lysons, A., Hatherly, D. Predicting a taxonomy of organisational effectiveness in U.K. higher educational institutions. High Educ 32, 23–39 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00139216

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00139216

Keywords

Search

Navigation