Bureaucratic Reputation in Higher Education: A Case Study

Öz

Bureaucratic reputation refers to the performances of top managers in public institutions, their behaviours in compliance with ethical values, their fair, impartial and transparent attitudes and technical competences in doing business and conducting operations. The reputation of the top management in public institutions plays an important role in establishing institutional reputation as well as providing motivation for employees and making the institution strong and attractive. In this connection, the purpose of the current study is to reveal the views of the faculty members working at a state university in the Western Mediterranean region on bureaucratic reputation. The study group of the current research is comprised of 20 faculty members working in a state university. In the study, the case study design, one of the qualitative research methods, was used to reveal the views of the faculty members. The collected data were analyzed by using the content analysis technique. As a result of the analyses, it was concluded that the top management of the state university has the adequate level of bureaucratic reputation. It was also found that the factors effective on the perception of bureaucratic reputation include the performance and abilities of the top management to find solutions to local and regional problems, their fairness and impartiality, their transparency and previous administrative experiences. Bureaucrats are also recommended to be fair, impartial and transparent while doing business and conducting operations and to form their work teams from people with managerial experience in order to increase their reputation.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• reputation
• bureaucratic reputation
• higher education institutions

Kaynakça

1. Parnell, J. A., & Dent, E. B. (2009). Philosophy, ethics, and capitalism: An interview with BB&T chairman John Allison. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 8(4), 587-596.
2. Sataøen, H. L. (2019). Sub-sector branding and nation branding: the case of higher education. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 24(3), 425-438.
3. Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63-75.
4. Stemler, S. (2000). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 7(1), 1-6.
5. Subaşı, M. and Okumuş, K. (2017). Bir araştırma yöntemi olarak durum çalışması [Case study as a research method]. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi [Atatürk Uiversity Social Sciences Institute Journal], 21(2), 419-426.
6. Toygar, Ş. A. (2011). Ankara İl Merkezindeki Sağlık Bakanlığına bağlı hastanelerdeki hastane yöneticilerinin problem çözme ve karar verme becerilerinin değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of the problem-solving and decision-making skills of hospital managers in hospitals affiliated to the Ministry of Health in the city of Ankara]. (Master's thesis). Ankara Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü) [Ankara University Health Sciences Institute]. Ankara
7. Ulutürk, S. (2015). Yeni kamu işletmeciliği yaklaşımından hareketle üniversitelerde performans uygulaması üzerine bir değerlendirme [An evaluation on the performance application in universities based on the new public management approach]. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi [Sülyeman Demirel University Economics and Administrative Sciences Faculty Journal], 20(4). 395-414
8. Usta, A. (2010). Kamu kurumlarında örgütsel performans yönetim süreci [Organizational performance management process in public institutions]. Sayıştay Dergisi [Audit Court Journal], (78), 31-58.

9. Van Vught, F. (2008). Mission diversity and reputation in higher education. Higher Education Policy, 21(2), 151-174.