Higher Education

, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 283–307 | Cite as

Metaphorical images of an organization: the power of symbolic constructs in reading change in higher education organizations

  • Hasan Simsek


Based on interviews with 24 faculty members at a large, public university, this article reports the use of metaphors as a new conceptual strategy to analyze change in higher education organizations. Results of the study indicate that strategic choices guiding the behavior of the organization under study and the metaphorical images held by the faculty members about their organization show a high degree of congruence. Implications for change and maintenance of enacted realities in higher education organizations are discussed.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baldridge, J.V., Curtis, D.V., Ecker, G. and Riley, L. (1978). Policy Making and Effective Leadership: A National Study of Academic Management. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  2. Bensimon, E.M., Neumann, A. and Birnbaum, R. (1989). Making Sense of Administrative Leadership: The “L” Word in Higher Education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report 1, Washington D.C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.Google Scholar
  3. Blau, P.M. and Schoenherr, R. (1971). The Structure of Organizations. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  4. Bolman, L.G. and Deal, T.E. (1991). Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Bredeson, P.V. (1985) . ‘An analysis of the metaphorical perspectives of school principals’, Educational Administration Quarterly, 21(1), 29–50.Google Scholar
  6. Burrell, G. and Morgan, G. (1983). Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis. London: Heinemann Educational Books.Google Scholar
  7. Clark, B.R. (1972) . ‘The organizational saga in higher education’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 178–183.Google Scholar
  8. Clark, B.R. (1983). The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspective. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  9. Clugston, R. (1987). Strategic Adaptation in Organized Anarchy: Priority Setting and Resource Allocation in the Liberal Arts College of a Public Research University. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, M. D. and March, J.G. (1974). Leadership and Ambiguity: The American College President. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  11. Emery, F.E. (1969). Systems Thinking. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.Google Scholar
  12. Foster, E. (1989-90) . ‘Planning at the University of Minnesota’, Planning for Higher Education, 18(2), 25–38.Google Scholar
  13. Hage, J. and Aiken, M. (1967) . ‘Program change and organizational properties: a comparative analysis’, American Journal of Sociology, 72, 503–519.Google Scholar
  14. Katz, D. and Kahn, R.L. (1978). The Social Psychology of Organizations, 2nd ed. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Keller, K.H. (1985). A Commitment to Focus: Report of Interim President Kenneth H. Keller to the Board of Regents. University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  16. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1982). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Lawrence, P.R. and Lorsch, J.W. (1967). Organization and Environment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration.Google Scholar
  18. Louis, K.S. and Simsek, H. (1991) . ‘Paradigm shifts and organizational learning: some theoretical lessons for restructuring schools’, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the University Council for Educational Administration. Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
  19. Miller, D. and Friesen, P.H. (1980) . ‘Momentum and revolution in organizational adaptation’, Academy of Management Journal, 23, 591–614.Google Scholar
  20. Morgan, G. (1980) . ‘Paradigms, metaphors and puzzle solving in organization theory’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 605–622.Google Scholar
  21. Morgan, Gareth (1986). Images of Organization. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Patton, M.Q. (1987). How to Use Qualitative Research in Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. Pugh, D., Hickson, H., Hinings, C.R. and Turner, C. (1969) . ‘The context of organizational structures’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 14, 91–114.Google Scholar
  24. Sackmann, S. (1989) . ‘The role of metaphors in organization transformation’, Human Relations, 42, 463–485.Google Scholar
  25. Scott, W.R. (1992). Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems, 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  26. Simsek, H. (1992). Organizational Change as Paradigm Shift: Analysis of Organizational Change Processes in a Large, Public University by Using a Paradigm-Based Change Model. Ph.D. Dissertation, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
  27. Simsek, H. and Heydinger, R.B. (1993) . ‘An Analysis of the Paradigmatic Evolution of U.S. Higher Education and Implications for the Year 2000', in Smart, J.C. (ed), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research. New York, NY: Agathon Press, Vol. 9, 1–49.Google Scholar
  28. Simsek, H. and Louis, K.S. (1994) . ‘Organizational change as paradigm shift: analysis of the change process in a large, public university’, Journal of Higher Education, 65(6), 670–695.Google Scholar
  29. Smircich, L. (1983) . ‘Concepts of culture and organizational analysis’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 339–358.Google Scholar
  30. Sterman, J. D. (1985) . ‘The growth of knowledge: testing a theory of scientific revolutions with a formal model’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 28, 93–122.Google Scholar
  31. Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Weick, K.E. (1976) . ‘Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 1–19.Google Scholar
  33. Wolcott, H.F. (1994).Transforming Qualitative Data: Description, Analysis and Interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Yin, R. (1984). Case Study Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hasan Simsek
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Education, Department of Educational SciencesMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations