This study examined administrative work in business, schools, and universities, by using tabular review to compare the findings of selected studies on patterns of behavior. Results of analysis show in spite of differences in organizations and goals, there is considerable similarity in the daily work realities of these executives studied. However, when differences did emerge, they were largely due to the executive's proximity to the operational core. Executives who were closer to the operational core, were less likely to have flexibility and control over their work, than executives who had layers embedded in their organization to shield them from the intensity of the operational core.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bernier, N. (1987). The dean as participant observer. Journal of Teacher Education, 38, 17-22.
2.
Biddle, B.J. (1979). Role theory: Expectations, identities, and behaviors . New York, NY: Academic Press.
3.
Biddle, B. J., & Thomas, E. J. (Eds.). (1966). Role theory: Concepts and research. New York, NY: Wiley .
4.
Bright, D.F., & Richards, M.P. (2001). The academic deanship: Individual careers and institutional roles. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
5.
Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
6.
Burns, T. (1954). The directions of activity and communication in a departmental executive group. Human Relations, 7, 73-97.
7.
Carlson, S. (1951). Executive behavior: A study of the work load and the working methods of managing directors. Stockholm: Strombergs.
8.
Charan, R., Drotter, S., & Noel, J. (Eds.). (2001). The leadership pipeline: How to build the leadership-powered company. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
9.
Deal, T.E., & Peterson, K.D. (1999). Shaping school culture: The heart of leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
10.
Dooley, D. (2001). Social research methods (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
11.
DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement. Bloomington, IN: National Educational Service.
12.
Dublin, R., & Spray, S.L. (1964). Executive behavior and interaction. Industrial Relations, 3, 99-108.
13.
Fayol, H. (1949). General and industrial management, (trans. by C. Storrs)London: Pitman.
14.
Geiger, J. (1989). Education deans as collaborative leaders. Journal of Teacher Education, 40, 2-4.
15.
Helgesen, S. (1990). The female advantage: Women's ways of leadership . New York, NY: Doubleday.
16.
Horne, J.H., & Lupton, T. (1965). The work activities of 'middle' managers - an exploratory study. The Journal of Management Studies, 2, 14-33.
17.
Jackson, J.F.L. (2000). Decanal work: Using role theory and the sociology of time to study the executive behavior of college of education deans. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University.
18.
Lambert, L. (1998). Building leadership capacity in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
19.
Luthans, F., Hodgetts, R.H., & Rosenkrantz, S. (1988). Real managers. New York: Ballinger Publishing.
20.
Manasse, L.A. (1985). Improving conditions for principal effectiveness: Policy Implications of research. Elementary School Journal , 85, 138-162.
21.
Martin, J., Samels, J.E., & Associates ( 1997). First among equals: The role of the chief academic officer. Baltimore and London: The John Hopkins University Press .
22.
McCarty, D.J., & Reyes, P. (1987). Organizational models of governance: Academic deans' decision making styles. Journal of Teacher Education , 38, 2-8.
23.
Merton, R.K. (1957). Social theory and social structure. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
24.
Mintzberg, H. (1973). The nature of managerial work. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
25.
Peterson, K.D. (1978). The principal's tasks. Administrator's Notebook, 26, 1-4.
26.
Peterson, K.D. (1998). Realities and reform: Living with the daily realities of principals' work. Instructional Leader, 11, 6-8.
27.
Sarbin, T.R. (1954). Role theory. In G. Lindzey (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
28.
Stewart, R. (1967). Managers and their jobs. London : Macmillan.
29.
Thompson, J.D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
30.
Turner, R.H. (1962). Role-taking process versus conformity. In A. M. Rose (Ed.), Human behavior and social processes: An interactionist approach. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
31.
Turner, H.R., & Colomy, P. (1988). Role differentiation: Orienting principles. In E. J. Lawler (Ed.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 5). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
32.
Wolverton, M., Gmelch, W.H., Montez, J., & Nies, C.T. (2001). The changing nature of the academic deanship. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report Volume 28:1.
33.
Zaccaro, S. J., & Klimoski, R. J. (Eds.). (2001). The nature of organizational leadership: Understanding the performance imperatives confronting today's leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass .
