3. CHAPTER THREE: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
3.3 The collegial Model of Educational Management
“… [an] organisation determines policy and makes decisions through a process of discussion leading to consensus. Power is shared among some or all members of the organisation who are thought to have a mutual understanding about objectives of the institution”.
3.3.1 Features and Advantages of Collegial Models
Bush (2003) argues that management should be based on agreement that is, decision making should be based on democratic principles. In a school context Campbell (2013) adds that everybody‟s ambitions, expertise and capabilities are taken into consideration and used in a way that promotes the welfare of the organisation. Shrifian (2011) agrees that teachers require a measure of autonomy in the classroom, but also need to collaborate to ensure a coherent approach to teaching and learning. Shared decisions are likely to be better informed and are also much more likely to be implemented effectively. A common set of values are held by members of the organisation. These guide the managerial activities of the organisation and are thought to lead to shared educational objectives. They also form part of the justification for the optimistic assumption that is always possible to reach agreement about goals and policies. The size of the decision making group is an important element. They have to be sufficiently small to enable everyone to be heard. This means that a group works better in sub-units which have formal representation within the various decision making bodies like heads of departments.
The collegial model assumes that decisions are reached more by consensus than conflict. There may be differences of opinion but they can be overcome by the force of argument (Campbell, 2013). Shrifian (2011) also says that the collegial model assumes that teachers have formal
68
representation within the various decision-making bodies. The democratic element of formal representation rests on the allegiance owed by participants to their constituencies. Imposing decisions on staff is considered morally repugnant, and inconsistent with the notion of consent.
Collegial management styles are characterised by managers developing close relationships with their staff in which they relate to on a personal level rather than simply a professional one. The idea is to try to develop a more effective working environment by endangering a friendly workplace, where employees see themselves as a close-knit team where every member has an important say in the decision-making process.
Olatoun (2012) emphasises that the collegial model of management is a supportive style, in which the main role of the manager is to provide employees with the tools they need to do their jobs. In this sense, the manager takes on a sort of liaison role between her employees and the rest of the organisation and in addition, employees rely on their managers to support them through sharing their expertise and experience. Shrifian (2011) argues that managers are important for facilitating team work within their departments. This model considers a manager and employee as more of a partnership relationship than a hierarchical one. In this sense, the manager provides the needed resources as far as possible in order for the organisation to do its job effectively. A manager and an employee see each other as team members working toward the same goal and with different strengths and roles towards achieving those goals.
Bush (2003) says that collegiality has become closely associated with school effectiveness and school improvement and is increasingly regarded as the official model of good practice.
Shrifian (2011) suggests that employee participation in decision-making has long been recognised as a source of enhancing organisational effectiveness. Therefore, organisational effectiveness can be considered as a function of the participation and relationship between organisational members. Castillo (2014) explains that with the collegial model, members of an organisation agree on its goals. Goals provide a general guide to activity, serve as a source of legitimacy, and are a means of measuring the success of the organisation. The structure of the organisation is an objective fact which has a clear meaning of all members of the institution.
The institution‟s environment is characterised by a decision making that has a participative process with all members of the organisation and having equal opportunity to influence policy and action. Thus in the context of this study, stakeholder participation becomes a major factor in the success of the school operation (Castillo, 2014). Similarly, resource mobilisation and management as processes in an organisation need consensus among stakeholders and building
69
firm relationships for support through sharing expertise and experience for the success of school operations (Bernath & Vidal, 2007; Motsamai et al., 2011; Castillo, 2014).
The collegial way of managing a school is likely to promote collaboration and reduce conflict between staff. The head teacher is expected to support teachers‟ efforts and motivate them to share and strive to achieve the school's values. The head helps teachers to cope with the difficulties encountered and promotes respect, democracy, honesty and trust. He/she encourages teachers to take part in educational seminars and provides equal opportunities for participation in decision making (Castillo, 2014). Individuals play a crucial role in establishing particular values within the environments in which they live and work. Shrifian (2011) also suggests that one advantage of the collegial style of management is that, with its close personal interactions, workers get to know their managers much better than those with a more authoritative and distant manager. Understanding organisational behaviour and what it can explain about employee interactions can help managers better understand how to deal with issues involving power and authority, resource allocation, support and team work. This implies that where the head teacher and colleagues work together as a team, they can achieve high productivity, better informed decisions and efficiency in resource management.
3.3.2 Some Disadvantages of Collegial Models
Shrifian (2011) reports that if a manager becomes too collegial with his/her staff it could undermine his/her ability to push on the staff when things need to improve. If a manager's relationship with the employees is too collegial, he/she could find himself/herself struggling with laying off, or firing workers than a boss who maintains a more distant and professional relationship with employees. Another limitation of this model according to Bush (2006) is that it tends to obscure rather than portray reality. Collegial approaches in decision making are slow and cumbersome. This is tortuous and time-consuming because policy proposals that require approval would have to go through a series of committees. There is no guarantee of unanimity on outcomes of the consensus that may be reached by committee members or participants. The participative aspect of decision making exists alongside the structural and bureaucratic components of organisations. It rests on authority of expertise possessed by professional staff and rarely trumps the positional authority of leaders and officials. In schools for example, collegial approaches may be difficult to sustain because heads and principals remain accountable to governing bodies and external authorities (Bush, 2006). This means therefore that this model‟s effectiveness depends in part on the attitudes of the staff. If they
70
actively support participation they may succeed. If they display apathy and hostility, they are likely to fail.
Therefore, school heads ought to be strategic about their leading roles (Bush, 2006; and Shrifian, 2011). The education system in Swaziland has a bureaucratic structure (MoET, 1970- 1974). However, schools can digress a bit from the mainstream, but most elements of management fit into the bureaucratic structure of the educational system. Within the collegial model, the governing body (school committee) of each school can set additional aims and objectives that would benefit the school, community, also the quality of the education offered (Bush, 2006; Seiler et al., 2007; & Shrifian, 2011). This could bring about strategic change in the way educational resources are maintained and managed in schools.
Apart from the limitations of the collegial model, the collegiality approach still plays an important role in the operation of a school. This suggests that for effective school functioning there is need for the involvement of all stakeholders in decision making regarding educational resource generation and management. This means that schools should satisfy the needs of learners, community and parents and not only to satisfy the bureaucrats. That is, schools may advise the MoET on their priorities and needs or integrate the various models in the administration role. In this study, I sought to utilise the features of this model to understand how stakeholders worked together in generating and managing resources. But, this theory on its own was not be enough to go the whole way in covering issues of resource management, therefore, there was need for other perspectives as I discuss below.