EVALUATION OF ACADEMIC LEADERSHIP MODELS: AHP APPROACH

Öz

Leadership in higher education institutions plays a key role in the follow-up of work, the smooth running of education and the emergence of academically successful studies. This situation makes it necessary to know which leadership model will be more useful in academia and to adopt that leadership style. Academic leadership has been important in every period. Because the success of an academic is directly dependent on the professional culture in which he/she works, which encourages or discourages his/her professional and academic development. In this context, academic leadership models in the literature were evaluated using the Analytic Hierarchy Process method, which is one of the multi-criteria decision-making methods. According to the results of the research, the type of academic leadership with the highest weight value (0.2064) was revealed as the servant leadership model with the code AL3. The leadership model with the second highest weight value (0.1773) was the transformational leadership model with the code AL2. As a result of the evaluations of all experts, the spiritual leadership model with the code AL7 (0,0744) and the passive leadership model with the code AL8 (0,0516), which were at the bottom of the ranking with the lowest weight values, were evaluated as the least preferred models.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Academic leadership
• Servant leadership
• Analytic hierarchy process

AKADEMİK LİDERLİK MODELLERİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ: AHP YAKLAŞIMI

Öz

Yükseköğretim kurumlarında liderlik, iş takibi, eğitimin aksamaması ve akademik anlamda başarılı çalışmaların ortaya çıkması için kilit bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu durum özellikle hangi liderlik modelinin akademide daha yararlı olacağının bilinmesini ve o liderlik tarzının benimsenmesini gerekli kılmaktadır. Akademik liderlik her dönemde önemli olmuştur. Çünkü bir akademisyenin başarısı, mesleki ve akademik gelişimini teşvik eden ya da caydıran, içinde çalıştığı mesleki kültüre doğrudan bağlıdır. Bu kapsamda literatürde yer alan akademik liderlik modelleri çok kriterli karar verme yöntemlerinden biri olan Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci yöntemiyle değerlendirilmiştir. Araştırma sonucuna göre en yüksek ağırlık değerine (0,2064) sahip akademik liderlik türü AL3 kodu ile hizmetkâr liderlik modeli olarak ortaya konmuştur. İkinci en yüksek ağırlık değerini (0,1773) alan liderlik modeli ise AL2 koduyla dönüşümcü liderlik modeli olmuştur. Tüm uzmanların değerlendirmeleri sonucu en düşük düzeyde ağırlık değerlerini alarak sıralamanın sonlarında yer alan AL7 kodlu manevi liderlik modeli (0,0744) ve AL8 kodlu pasif liderlik modeli (0,0516) en az tercih edilen modeller olarak değerlendirilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Akademik liderlik
• Hizmetkâr liderlik
• Analitik hiyerarşi süreci

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma için Hamidiye Bilimsel Araştırmalar ve Etik Kurulu 16.02.2024 tarih ve 2/27 sayılı kararı ile etik kurul izni alınmıştır.

Kaynakça

1. Alblas, G. ve Wijsman, E. (2021). Organisational Behaviour. Organisational Behaviour. doi:10.4324/9781003194736
2. Astin, A. W. ve Astin, H. S. (2000). Leadership Reconsidered: Engaging Higher Education in Social Change. W.K. KELLOGG.
3. Baert, P. ve Morgan, M. (2018). A performative framework for the study of intellectuals. European Journal of Social Theory, 21(3), 322–339. doi:10.1177/1368431017690737
4. Bagnall, J. (2021). In Praise of the Incomplete Leader - Responsible Leadership.
5. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations. The Academy of Management Review, 12(4), 756. doi:10.2307/258081
6. Bass, B. M. (1997). Does the Transactional - Transformational Leadership Paradigm Transcend Organizational and National Boundaries? American Psychologist, 52(2), 130–139. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.2.130
7. Bass, B. M. (1999). Two Decades of Research and Development in Transformational Leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(1), 9–32. doi:10.1080/135943299398410
8. Bass, B. M. (2000). The Future of Leadership in Learning Organizations. Journal of Leadership Studies, 7(3), 18–40. doi:10.1177/107179190000700302

9. Bass, B. M., Waldman, D. A., Avolio, B. J. ve Bebb, M. (1987). Transformational Leadership and the Falling Dominoes Effect. Group & Organization Management, 12(1), 73–87. doi:10.1177/105960118701200106
10. Becher, T. ve Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories (McGraw-Hil.). U.K.
11. Birnbaum, R. (1989). The Implicit Leadership Theories of College and University Presidents. The Review of Higher Education, 12(2), 125–136. doi:10.1353/rhe.1989.0025
12. Blair, J. (2000). Schools of Education Tracking Down “Big Money” - Education Week. Education Week, 20(12), 1, 14–15. https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/schools-of-education-tracking-down-big-money/2000/11 adresinden erişildi.
13. Bolden, R., Petrov, G. ve Gosling, J. (2009). Distributed leadership in higher education: Rhetoric and reality. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 37(2), 257–277. doi:10.1177/1741143208100301
14. Brungardt, C. (1998). The new face of leadership: Implications for higher education. Leadership Studies, Fort Hays State University, from: iscb@ fhsu. edu. 5 Ocak 2024 tarihinde http://nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/lead_edu.html adresinden erişildi.
15. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership (Harper & R.). New York.
16. Bush, T. (2017). The enduring power of transformational leadership. Educational Management Administration and Leadership, 45(4), 563–565. doi:10.1177/1741143217701827
17. David, R. ve McKenna, B. (2009). Knowledge, wisdom and intellectual leadership: A question of the future and knowledge-based sustainability. International Journal of Learning and Intellectual Capital, 6(1–2), 52–70. doi:10.1504/IJLIC.2009.021720
18. Den Hartog, D. N. ve de Hoogh, A. H. B. (2009). Empowering behaviour and leader fairness and integrity: Studying perceptions of ethical leader behaviour from a levels-of-analysis perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 18(2), 199–230. doi:10.1080/13594320802362688
19. Doraiswamy, I. R. (2012). Servant or Leader? Who will stand up please? International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(9), 178–183.
20. Ervay, S. (2006). Academic Leadership in America’s Public Schools. NASSP Bulletin, 90(2), 77–86. doi:10.1177/0192636506290175
21. Farling, M. L., Stone, A. G. ve Winston, B. E. (1999). Servant leadership: Setting the stage for empirical research. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 6(1–2), 49–72. doi:10.1177/107179199900600104
22. Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness (Paulist Pr.). New Jersey.
23. Gronn, P. (2000). Distributed Properties. Educational Management & Administration, 28(3), 317–338. doi:10.1177/0263211x000283006
24. Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 13(4), 423–451. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(02)00120-0
25. Hafeez, K., Malak, N. ve Zhang, Y. B. (2007). Outsourcing non-core assets and competences of a firm using analytic hierarchy process. Computers and Operations Research, 34(12), 3592–3608. doi:10.1016/j.cor.2006.01.004
26. Harker, P. T. ve Vargas, L. G. (1987). Theory of Ratio Scale Estimation: Saaty’S Analytic Hierarchy Process. Management Science, 33(1), 1383–1403.
27. Hosking, D. M. (1988). Organizing, Leadership and Skilful Process. Journal of Management Studies, 25(2), 147–166.
28. Hu, S. (2011). Scholarship Awards, Student Engagement, and Leadership Capacity of High-Achieving Low-Income Students of Color. The Journal of Higher Education, 82(5), 511–534. doi:10.1080/00221546.2011.11777216
29. Huang, T. C. K., Chen, Y. L. ve Chang, T. H. (2015). A novel summarization technique for the support of resolving multi-criteria decision making problems. Decision Support Systems, 79, 109–124. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2015.08.004
30. Hussain, H. K., Talib, N. A. ve Shah, I. M. (2014). Exploring the impact of transformational leadership on process innovation and product innovation: A case of Iraqi public universities. Asian Social Science, 10(21), 168–174. doi:10.5539/ass.v10n21p168
31. İsfahani, A. N., Sabhani, M., Pol, J. K. ve Amani, M. (2015). Analysis of the effect of spiritual leadership and its consequences on organizational performance by using a balanced scorecard in small and medium enterprises in Isfahan. Scientific Journal of Organizational Culture Management, 13(1), 247–265. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.22059/jomc.2015.53302
32. Jaser, Z. (2021). The connecting leader. Aligning leadership theories to managers’ issues. Leadership, 17(3), 376–382. doi:10.1177/1742715020981188
33. Jones, D. ve Rudd, R. (2008). Transactional, Transformational, or Laissez-Faire Leadership: an Assessment of College of Agriculture Academic Program Leaders’ (Deans) Leadership Styles. Journal of Agricultural Education, 49(2), 88–97. doi:10.5032/jae.2008.02088
34. Kezar, A. ve Lester, J. (2009). Supporting faculty grassroots leadership. Research in Higher Education, 50(7), 715–740. doi:10.1007/s11162-009-9139-6
35. Khan, M. M., Mubarik, M. S., Ahmed, S. S., Islam, T. ve Khan, E. (2022). The contagious servant leadership: exploring the role of servant leadership in leading employees to servant colleagueship. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 43(6), 847–861. doi:10.1108/LODJ-06-2021-0305
36. Koen, M. P. ve Bitzer, E. M. (2010). Academic leadership in higher education: A participative perspective from one institution. Academic Leadership, 8(1). doi:10.58809/ufqd3521
37. Kotter, J. P. (2002). What leaders really do. MPT Metallurgical Plant and Technology International. https://hbr.org/2001/12/what-leaders-really-do adresinden erişildi.
38. Kraus, S., Harms, R., Fink, M., ve Kailer, N. (2015). The role of social innovation in a network-based governance approach: A research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 70, 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.01.028
39. Lichtenstein, R., o ve M., M. (2006). The Leadership Experience. Organizational Leadership, 17(1), 62–74. doi:10.1108/14777280910932816
40. Malik, A., Awan, I., Asim, M. ve Qazi, A. (2023). A critical review of social exchange theory in leadership studies: what’s next? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 44(4), 735–746. doi:10.1108/LODJ-07-2021-0344
41. McCarthy, J. ve Wiles, J. (2009). The United Kingdom’s House of Lords and the legislative process: a gendered perspective. Gender and Education, 21(4), 371–386. doi:10.1080/09540250802615171
42. Mehta, R. ve Mehta, R. (2015). Examining the relationship between servant leadership and trust. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 5(12), 1–10. doi:10.6007/IJARBSS/v5-i12/1999
43. Morrison, G. R. (2009). Transformational Leadership in Education: A Review of the Literature. In Handbook of Research on Educational Leadership for Equity and Diversity (s. 108–126). doi:10.4018/978-1-60566-254-2.ch007
44. Mullen, C. A. (2015). Fostering a culture of shared leadership in a higher education institution: a case study of a community college. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 39(5), 453–463. doi:10.1080/10668926.2014.922367
45. Mumford, A. (2006). What is leadership? Leadership, 2(2), 179–190. doi:10.1177/1742715006062835
46. Neck, C. P. ve Houghton, J. D. (2006). Two decades of self-leadership theory and research: Past developments, current trends, and future directions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(4), 270–295. doi:10.1108/02683940610663156
47. Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). SAGE Publications.
48. Ornstein, A. C. ve Hunkins, F. P. (2018). Curriculum: Foundations, principles, and issues (6th ed.). Pearson.
49. Phipps, K. (2017). Leadership in the Age of the Millennials: New Challenges for the Management of Higher Education. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 21(2), 73–77. doi:10.1080/13603108.2017.1395750
50. Poole, M. S., van de Ven, A. H., Dooley, K. ve Holmes, M. (2000). Organizational Change and Innovation Processes: Theory and Methods for Research. New York: Oxford University Press.
51. Reiter-Palmon, R., Duffy, M. K. ve Karp, A. (2019). A taxonomy of collaborative leadership: A framework for academic leaders. Journal of Leadership Studies, 12(1), 6–18. doi:10.1002/jls.21533
52. Robinson, V. M. J. (2007). School leadership and student outcomes: Identifying what works and why. Educational Leadership, 65(1), 5–13.
53. Robinson, V. M. J., Hohepa, M., ve Lloyd, C. (2009). School Leadership and Student Outcomes: Identifying What Works and Why. Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration, 2. Ministry of Education, New Zealand. https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/series/2515/38233
54. Rosenberg, D. (2010). Character and its discontents. Leadership, 6(3), 221–231. doi:10.1177/1742715010375514
55. Sadeghi, A., Yavari, N. ve Mahmoudi, M. (2013). The relationship between transformational leadership and organizational commitment in academic staff of Islamic Azad University. World Applied Sciences Journal, 23(4), 532–538.
56. Sahu, T. N. ve Choudhary, R. (2019). Impact of transformational leadership on the job satisfaction of teachers in higher education institutions: A study of a university in India. International Journal of Educational Management, 33(6), 1101–1115. doi:10.1108/IJEM-05-2018-0177
57. Sergiovanni, T. J. (2001). Leadership: What’s in it for schools? (3rd ed.). Taylor & Francis.
58. Sezgin, F. (2014). Transformational Leadership Behaviours of School Principals and their Effect on Teachers’ Job Satisfaction. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(3), 1064–1071.
59. Smith, B. L. ve MacGregor, J. (2009). Learning together in community. In P. B. Corcoran & D. W. Kinsella (Eds.), Learning communities: Reforming undergraduate education (s. 51–66). Jossey-Bass.
60. Sosik, J. J. ve Godshalk, V. M. (2000). The role of personal values in the transformational leadership process. Leadership Quarterly, 11(2), 187–208. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(00)00035-3
61. Spillane, J. P. (2006). Distributed leadership. Educational Forum, 70(3), 219–234. doi:10.1080/00131720608984628
62. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R. ve Diamond, J. B. (2001). Investigating school leadership practice: A distributed perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(1), 23–34. doi:10.1177/001316101037001
63. Stewart, D. W. (2013). Academic Leadership: An Emerging Perspective on Leadership in Higher Education. New Directions for Higher Education, 2013(164), 5–14. doi:10.1002/he.20049
64. Wagner, J. A. ve Hollenbeck, J. R. (2014). Organizational Behavior: Securing Competitive Advantage. New York: Routledge.
65. Walker, A., & Dimmock, C. (2005). Leadership for the future: The role of school leaders. International Studies in Educational Administration, 33(2), 24–33.
66. Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organizations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.