Research in Higher Education

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 125–143 | Cite as

Leadership situations in academic departments: Relations among measures of situational favorableness and control

  • Norman E. Groner


Measures of attributes of leadership situations faced by chairmen in academic divisions and departments were theoretically and empirically related. Measures of task structure and member relations were derived from Fiedler's (1967) Contingency Model of Leadership, and measures of total control and relative control were derived from Tannenbaum's (1967) Control Graph Theory. Two correlational studies using samples of community college divisions and university departments indicated that hypotheses derived from research undertaken in business and military settings were not generally supported in higher educational settings. Consistent findings across both studies indicated that high task structure (faculty homogeneity and academic task structure) is associated with better member relations and greater cooperation on administrative matters. Implications for administrators are briefly discussed.

Key words

university departments community college divisions chairmen leadership control task structure faculty relations 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson, A. B. Combined effects of interpersonal attraction and goal-path clarity on the cohesiveness of task oriented groups.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1975,31 68–75.Google Scholar
  2. Bachman, J. G. Faculty satisfaction and the dean's influence: an organizational study of twelve liberal arts colleges.Journal of Applied Psychology 1968,52 55–61.Google Scholar
  3. Bachman, J. G., Smith, C. G., and Slesinger, J. A. Control, performance and satisfaction: an analysis of structural and individual effects.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1966,4 127–136.Google Scholar
  4. Bachman, J. G., and Tannenbaum, A. S. The control-satisfaction relationship across varied areas of experience.The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal 1966,8 16–25,Google Scholar
  5. Bowers, D. G. Organizational control in an insurance company.Sociometry 1964,27 230–244.Google Scholar
  6. Brann, J. The chairman: an impossible job gets tougher. In Brann and Emmett (Eds.),The academic department or division chairman: A complex role. Detroit: Balamp, 1972.Google Scholar
  7. Brewer, J. Organizational patterns of supervision: A study of the debureaucratization of authority relations in two business organizations. In Grusky, O., and Miller, G. A. (Eds.),The sociology of organizations: Basic studies. New York: Free Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  8. Cangemi, J. P. Leadership characteristics of business executives appropriate for leaders in higher education.Education 1975,95 229–232.Google Scholar
  9. Cope, R. G. Bases of power, administrative preferences and job satisfaction: a situational approach.Journal of Vocational Behavior 1972,2 457–465.Google Scholar
  10. Etzioni, A.A comparative analysis of complex organizations. Glencoe: Macmillan, 1961.Google Scholar
  11. Fiedler, F. E.A theory of leadership effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.Google Scholar
  12. Fiedler, F. E., and Gillo, M. W. Correlates of performance in community colleges.Journal of Higher Education 1974,45 672–681.Google Scholar
  13. French, J. R. P., Jr., and Raven, B. The bases of social power. In I. D. Cartwright and A. Zander (Eds.),Groups dynamics: Research and theory. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson, 1960, pp. 607–623.Google Scholar
  14. Gillo, M. W., Landerholm, M., and Goldsmith, D. N. Goals and educational trends in community colleges.Journal of Higher Education. 1974,45 491–503.Google Scholar
  15. Heimler, C. H. The college departmental chairman. In Brann and Emmett (Eds.),The academic department and division chairman: A complex role. Detroit: Balamp, 1972.Google Scholar
  16. Koehnline, W. A., and Heimler, C. H. The division chairman in the community college. In Brann and Emmett (Eds.),The academic department and division chairman: A complex role. Detroit: Balamp, 1972.Google Scholar
  17. Likert, R.The human organization: Its management and value. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.Google Scholar
  18. McGregor, D. M.The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1960.Google Scholar
  19. Raven, B. H., and Rietsema, J. The effects of varied clarity of group goals and group path upon the individual and his relations to his group.Human Relations 1957,10 29–44.Google Scholar
  20. Smith, C. G., and Ari, O. N. Organizational control structure and member consensus.American Journal of Sociology 1964,69 623–638.Google Scholar
  21. Smith, C. G., and Brown, M. E. Communication structure and control structure in a voluntary association.Sociometry 1964,27 449–468.Google Scholar
  22. Smith, C. G., and Tannenbaum, A. S. Organizational control structure: a comparative analysis.Human Relations 1963,16 299–316.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, P. C. The development of a method of measuring job satisfaction: The Cornell studies. In Fleishman, E. A. (Ed.)Studies in personnel and industrial psychology (revised edition), Homewood, IL: Dorsey, 1967.Google Scholar
  24. Tannenbaum, A. S. Control and effectiveness in a voluntary organization.American Journal of Sociology 1961,67 33–46.Google Scholar
  25. Tannenbaum, A. S.Control in organizations. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.Google Scholar
  26. Thompson, J. D.Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© APS Publications, Inc. 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • Norman E. Groner
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of WashingtonSeattle

Personalised recommendations