This paper provides a conceptual approach to solve problems of governance, management, and leadership in an academic institution in order to improve on; accountability, student enrollment, and cost reduction. An institution should develop a new approach to governance, management and leadership that is based upon a cybernetic model (Birnbaum, 1991).
The cybernetic model approach is important because it suggests how other subsystems in an institution function simultaneously, in all types of colleges and universities, to enhance a self-correcting institution. The self-correcting process of an institution focus on a control structure that is defined in terms of a signaling mechanism to monitor acceptable changes that can enhance fundamental changes within an institution.
There are four main models of institutional governance that are crucial in the evolving literature of higher education. These models include; the institution as a bureaucracy, a collegial system, a political system, and an organized anarchy. These models assist in the analysis of an organizational structure of an institution. Organizations are composed of three levels of control and responsibility. These comprise of the technical level, the institutional level, and the managerial level.
The managerial level is important because it provides a link between the technical level and the institutional level and buffers the technical level against problems of funding, fluctuations in student enrollments and political interference (Birnbaum, 1991). According to Birnbaum (1991), the technical level should ensure rationality in decision making and should also encompass bureaucracy in management.
The technical level in an institution comprises of elements that turn inputs, such as, students, finances, and societal expectations, into outputs, such as, graduates, knowledge, service and status. In an educational institution, inputs in an open system are more complex and encompass various components like; different ideologies, individuals, resources, as well as, other subsystems (Birnbaum, 1988).
Moreover, a faculty should make transformations in response to the technological advancements and the institution should develop an effective administrative system, technical system, and improve the learning environment. Putting more emphasis on the technical system ensures that an institution will transform the inputs into outputs in a process through which teaching, research and other services are accomplished.
Teaching and research are the most basic elements that pose a greater degree of uncertainty to most institutions. According to Birnbaum (1991) an academic institution should work in an environment that uses modern technology with an effective governance system. An Institution should respond to an environment that provides a new face on both economic and social terms, as well as, political and physical character.
The differences in a college environment are equivalent to its technical subsystems, therefore, an institution should improve on teaching, research and services, in order to, enhance technological innovations by allocating more effort to the technical level.
School enrollment should be based on a policy that supports open admissions and that puts emphasis on remedial education that is not present in other selective institutions. In addition, an institution should hire more PhD holders in order to realize professionalism in service delivery.
According to Birnbaum (1991), this will enhance a distinct pattern of technology in the institution’s operations. The technical chore and the managerial systems should work together by incorporating technology to improve the process of institutional management. A stable management system is appropriate when change is not frequent in an institution and in situations where problems persist.
Therefore an institution should incorporate a centralized decision-making process with specific planning to achieve its vision and mission. This calls for a cybernetic model to be utilized in the technical level in this type of an environment.
When an institution experiences frequent problems, technology will be required in order to realize minimized centralization. Thus, in order to manage finances, increase student enrollment, increase the use of information technology, and to foster accountability in the management of an institution, adaptive technology provides the best option.
An institution should design an organizational structure that comprises of a coordinated management process, in order to, achieve its plans and to enhance accountability within its operations. Furthermore, students’ enrollments and economic cost reductions can be improved by hiring adjunct faculty. An institution should transform its organizational structure, in order to, meet the modern faculty requirements.
Therefore, an instructional model is important than the learning model because it leads to fundamental changes in the responsibility of a faculty. The faculty should facilitate the creation of an appropriate environment for students from diverse backgrounds to learn. This will entail the use of technology to include the application of distance learning that will enhance a new measure of productivity.
In addition, an institution should hire professionals to operate in a decentralized manner, in order to, realize fundamental changes in organizational structure. These will foster a fundamental change in the role of the technical core that comprises of the structure and design, technology and operations, as well as, human resources.
In conclusion, the cybernetic model is an important tool that can be employed to achieve the desirable changes in an institution. It provides direction through self-regulation that may be accomplished through the use of cybernetic controls. It is a self-correcting mechanism that closely monitors an organization’s functions by providing signals to participants when things are not operating well (Marcus, 1997).
A cybernetic institution provides an effective leadership that functions according to the cybernetic principles. The cybernetic principles can influence an organizational constraint and when the model is combined with effective leadership skills, it creates an environment that fosters fundamental changes in an institution (Alfred, 1998).
References
Alfred, R., L. (1998). Shared governance in community colleges. Education commission of the states: Policy paper, 1-8.
Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Birnbaum, R. (1991). Effective administration and leadership in the cybernetic institution. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Marcus, L., R. (1997). Restructuring state higher education governance patterns. The review of higher education, 20(4), 399-418.