Skip to main content
Log in

Positing Organizational Effectiveness as a Second-Order Construct in Hong Kong Higher Education Institutions

  • Published:
Research in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study examines the relative importance of the various organizational effectiveness dimensions in higher education institutions by positing organizational effectiveness as a second-order construct. Based on the findings of a survey administered to university academics in Hong Kong universities, the second-order structure of organizational effectiveness was supported. The findings reflected that the student-related dimensions were not considered as important as the dimensions related to faculty employment and satisfaction and suggested the disproportionate influence of the governing body on universities in Hong Kong.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Brown, M. W., and Cudeck, R. (1993) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: Bollen, K. A., and Long, J. S. (eds.), Testing Structural Equation Models, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 136–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byran, B. M. (1998). Structural Equation Modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S. (1978). Measuring organizational effectiveness in institutions of higher education. Administrative Science Quarterly 23: 604–632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S. (1980). Critical questions in assessing organizational effectiveness. Organizational Dynamics 9: 66–80.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S. (1983). Strategic responses to conditions of decline: Higher education and the private sector. Journal of Higher Education 54: 359–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S. (1986). A study of organizational effectiveness and its predictors. Management Science 32(1): 87–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S., and Ettington, D. R. (1988). The conceptual foundations of organizational culture. In: Smart, J. C. (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (Vol. 4), Agathon Press, New York, pp. 356–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S., and Tschirhart, M. (1992). Postindustrial environments and organizational effectiveness in Colleges and Universities. Journal of Higher Education 63(1): 87–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, K. S., and Whetten, D. A. (1983). Organizational Effectiveness: A Comparison of Multiple Models, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cudeck, R., and Browne, M. W. (1983). Cross-validation of covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioural Research 18: 147–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fjortoft, N., and Smart, J. C. (1994). Enhancing organizational effectiveness: The importance of culture type and mission agreement. Higher Education 27: 429–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P. S., Atkin, R. S., and Schoorman, F. D. (1983). On the demise of organizational effectiveness studies. In: Cameron, K. S., and Whetten, D. A. (eds.), Organizational Effectiveness: A Comparison of Multiple Models, Academic Press, New York, pp. 163–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P. S., and Pennings, J. M. (1980). Critical issues in assessing organizational effectiveness. In: Lawler, III, E. E., Nadler, D. A., and Cammann, C. (eds.), Organizational Assessment: Perspectives on the Measurement of Organizational Behaviour and the Quality of Working Life, Wiley, New York, pp. 108–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., and Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate Data Analysis with Readings, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harzing, A.-W. (2000). Cross-national industrial mail surveys—why do response rates differ between countries? Industrial Marketing Management 29: 243–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayduk, L. A., and Glaser, D. N. (2000). Jiving the four-step, waltzing around factor analysis, and other serious fun. Structural Equation Modeling 7(1): 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janoski, T. (1998). Citizenship and Civil Society: A Framework of Rights and Obligations in Liberal, Traditional, and Social Democratic Regimes, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnes, J., and Taylor, J. (1990). Performance Indicators in Higher Education, Open University Press, Bristol, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G., and Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8 User's Reference Guide, Scientific Software International, Chicago.

  • Kwan, P. (2002). An investigation of the relationship between organizational culture and organizational effectiveness in Hong Kong higher education institutions, Doctorate dissertation, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A. (1990a). Taxonomies of higher educational institutions predicted from organisation climate. Research in Higher Education 31: 115–128.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A. (1993). The typology of organizational effectiveness in Australian higher education. Research in Higher Education 34: 465–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A., 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., and Hatherly, D. (1996). Predicting a taxonomy of organizational effectiveness in U.K. higher educational institutions. Higher Education 32: 23–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A., and Hatherly, D. (1998). Comparison of measures of organizational effectiveness in U.K. higher educational institutions. Higher Education 36(1): 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A., Hatherly, D., and Mitchell, D. A. (1998). Comparison of measures of organizational effectiveness in U.K. higher education. Higher Education 36(1): 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lysons, A., 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 18(6): 697–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W. (1987). The hierarchical structure of self-concept and the application of hierarchical confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement 24(1): 17–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., Balla, J. R., and McDonald, R. P. (1988). Goodness-of-fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of sample size. Psychological Bulletin 103(3): 391–410.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., and Hau, K. T. (1996). Assessing goodness of fit: Is parsimony always desirable? Journal of Experimental Education 64(4): 364–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., and O'Neill, R. (1984). Self description questionnaire III: The construct validity of multidimensional self-concept ratings by late adolescents. Journal of Educational Measurement 21(2): 153–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ming Pao (2001 February, 19). Criticism on graduates' poor communication skills by employers. (In Chinese).

  • Pedhazur, E. J., and Schmelkin, L. P. (1991). Measurement, Design and Analysis: An Integrated Approach, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. C. (1989). Organizational decline and effectiveness in private higher education. Research in Higher Education 30: 387–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. C., and Hamm, R. E. (1993a). Organizational effectiveness and mission orientations of two-year colleges. Research in Higher Education 34: 489–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. C., and Hamm, R. E. (1993b). Organizational culture and effectiveness in twoyear colleges. Research in Higher Education 34: 95–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. C., Kuh, G. D., and Tierney, W. G. (1997). The roles of institutional cultures and decision approaches in promoting organizational effectiveness in two-year colleges. Journal of Higher Education 68(3): 256–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. C., Hatherly, D., and Mitchell, D. A. (1998). Comparison of measures of organizational effectiveness in U.K. higher education. Higher Education 36: 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smart, J. C., and St. John, E. P. (1996). Organizational culture and effectiveness in higher education: A test of the culture type and strong culture hypotheses. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 18(3): 219–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka, J. S. (1993). Multifaceted conceptions of fit in structural equation models. In: Bollen, J. A., and Long, J. S. (eds.), Testing Structural Equation Models, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 10–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • University Grants Committee of Hong Kong (2000). UGC management reviews overarching report, Hong Kong Government Printer, Hong Kong.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuan, K.-H., and Bentler, P. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with robust covariances. Sociological Methodology 28(1): 363–396.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paula Kwan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kwan, P., Walker, A. Positing Organizational Effectiveness as a Second-Order Construct in Hong Kong Higher Education Institutions. Research in Higher Education 44, 705–726 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026179626082

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026179626082

Navigation