نویسندگان
1 کارشناس مسئول، مؤسسه پژوهش و برنامه‌ریزی آموزش عالی، تهران، ایران
2 استادیار گروه نوآوری آموزشی و درسی، مؤسسه پژوهش و برنامه ریزی آموزش عالی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
هدف پژوهش حاضر ارائه چارچوبی برای خودگردانی مالی دانشگاه‌های دولتی شهر تهران، با رویکردی کیفی و از منظر روش کاربردی و قلمرو مکانی پژوهش دانشگاه‌های دولتی شهر تهران بود. با توجه به محدود بودن جامعه، نمونه‌گیری به صورت هدفمند انجام شد و 20 نفر از خبرگان با سابقه اجرایی در زمینه مدیریت منابع مالی دانشگاه انتخاب شدند. داده‌ها با روش مصاحبه نیمه ساختار یافته گردآوری شد. دو گام اصلی برای دستیابی به هدف پژوهش، شناسایی راهبردهای کلی برای خودگردانی مالی دانشگاه‌ها با استفاده از روش سوات و ارائه چارچوب خودگردانی مالی دانشگاه‌ها با بهره گیری از روش مدلسازی ساختاری تفسیری بود. در مرحله نخست از تشکیل ماتریس سوات و برهمکنشی راهبردهای چهارگانه، 14 راهبرد کلی و بهینه برای خودگردانی مالی دانشگاه شناسایی شد. می‌توان گفت که خودگردانی مالی با بازاندیشی و مدیریت در فرایندهای درونی دانشگاه‌ها آغاز می‌شود. مرحله دوم پژوهش چرایی مرحله نخست را تبیین کرد و نشان داد که هر یک از راهبردهای شناسایی شده در مرحله نخست، در یک ساختار شماتیک چگونه با یکدیگر و با کل ساختار دانشگاه مرتبط هستند. بر پایه نتایج این مرحله، راهبردهای خودگردانی مالی دانشگاه‌های مورد مطالعه در 5 سطح دسته‌بندی شد. با توجه به ویژگی‌های هر سطح و اصول حاکم بر تفسیر نتایج مدلسازی ساختاری تفسیری، اگر دانشگاه بخواهد در قلمرو خودگردانی مالی به نتیجه برسد، باید از نقطه‌ای آغاز کند که در برگیرنده عوامل درونزای نظام دانشگاهی است. عوامل میانجی شناسایی شده در این چارچوب از جمله عواملی هستند که با مدیریت و برنامه‌ریزی مناسب می‌تواند تغییرات چشمگیری را در قلمرو کسب درآمد و تغییر رویه‌های درآمدزایی دانشگاه ایجاد کنند. نتایج نشان داد که در میان عوامل مختلف و متعدد مؤثر بر خودگردانی مالی دانشگاه‌ها، برخی با توجه به جایگاه آنها در چارچوب، نقش کلیدی‌تری دارند و می‌توانند عاملی برای حرکت رو به جلو دانشگاه در رسیدن به خودگردانی مالی باشند. مدیریت و برنامه‌ریزی برای تغییر و فعال‌سازی هر یک از عوامل میانجی می‌تواند دانشگاه را یک گام به خودگردانی مالی نزدیک‌تر کند. با توجه به محدودیت منابع و ناپایداری‌های اقتصادی، بهتر است دانشگاه نخست راهبردهایی را برگزیند که اولویت بالاتری دارند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
A framework for financial autonomy in universities applying Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) technique
نویسندگان [English]
- Shadi Rouhani 1
- Zahra Rashidi 2
1 Ph.D. Graduate of Higher education, Institute for Research and Planning in Higher Education, Tehran, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Innovation and Training, Institute for Research and Planning in Higher Education, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]
The purpose of this study was to provide a framework for financial autonomy of public universities in Tehran with qualitative approach. Due to the limited size of the population, purposive sampling was performed in which 20 experts with experience in the field of university financial management were selected. Semi-structured interviews were used to collect the required data. To achieve the goal of the research, two main steps were taken: 1) Identifying general strategies for financial self-governance of universities, in which at this stage, the SWOT technique was used to achieve general strategies. Analysis of results in the first step of the formation of the SWOT matrix and the interaction of the four strategies, identified 14 general and optimal strategies for financial autonomy of the university. Thus, it can be concluded that financial autonomy begins with rethinking and managing the internal processes of universities. 2) Providing a framework for financial autonomy of the studied universities, in which the Interpretive Structural Modeling method was used. The second step of the research actually explained why the first stage shows the policy maker and planner of higher and university education how each of the strategies identified in the first stage, in a schematic structure together with the whole structure of the university are in touch. Based on the results of this stage, the financial autonomy strategies of the studied universities were classified into 5 levels. Given the characteristics of each level and the principles governing the interpretation of the results of ISM, if universities are to succeed in the realm of financial autonomy, they must start from a point that is more inclusive of the endogenous factors of the university system. Identified linkage factors in this context are among the factors that with proper management and planning can be expected to make significant changes in the realm of revenue and change revenue generation practices. In general, the results showed that among the various factors that can affect the financial autonomy of universities, some have more key role compared to other actors, due to their position in the framework, and they can be a factor in moving the university forward in achieving financial autonomy. Therefore, managing and planning to change and activate each of the factors extracted in the linkage factors section, can bring the university one step closer to financial autonomy. Due to limited resources and economic instability, it is better for a university to first choose strategies that have a higher priority.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Financial autonomy
- public universities
- Interpretive Structural Modeling
2. Aghion, P., Dewatripont, M., Hoxby, C., Mas-Collel, A. & Sapir, A. (2010). The governance and performance of universities: Evidence from Europe and the U.S. Economic Policy, 25(61), 7-59.
3. Ahangaran, J. (1998). Investigating the ways of financing: The higher education sector of the country. Daneshgah Enghelab Quarterly, 111, 175-192 [in Persian].
4. Alptekin, N. (2013). Integration of SWOT analysis and TOPSIS method in strategic decision-making process. The Macro Theme Review, 2(7), 1-8.
5. Amaral, A., Jones, G.A., & Karseth, B. (2002). Governing higher education: Comparing national perspectives. In Alberto Amaral, Glen A. Jones and Berit Karseth (ed.). Governing higher education: National perspectives on institutional governance. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 279-298.
6. Barr, M.J., & McClellan, G.S. (2017). Budgets and financial management in higher education. John Wiley & Sons publication, ISBN: 9781119287735.
7. Budget Act (2017-2018). Tehran, Iran: Presidency Plan and Budget Organization Press (in Persian).
8. Cabalin, C. (2015). Mediatizing higher education policies: Discourses about quality education in the media. Critical Studies in Education, 56(2), 224-240.
9. Davies, P., Németh, B., & Pausits, A. (2010). Development and management of university lifelong learning. In J. Huisman & A. Pausits (Eds.), Higher education management and development. Waxmann: Münster.
10. Daxner, M. (2010). Higher education and society. In J. Huisman & A. Pausits (Eds.), Education Management and Development. Waxmann: Münster.
11. Delello, J.A., McWhorter, R.R., & Marmion, S.L. (2018). Understanding the productivity of faculty members in higher education. Int. J. Management in Education, 12(2), 154-178.
12. Dohmen, D. (2014). Performance-based funding in Germany’s higher education system. Paper Presented at the EUA Funding Forum, Bergamo, Italy. http://www.eua.be/Libraries/Funding_Forum/Dohmen_EUA-Bergamo_Performance-based-Funding_141008.sflb.ashx.
13. Ekpoh, U.I., & Okpa, O.E. (2017). Diversification of sources of funding university education for sustainability: Challenges and Strategies for improvement. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioral Science, 21(2), 1-8.
14. Esterman, T., Nokkala, T. & Steinel, M. (2011). University autonomy in Europe II: The scorecard. Brussels: EUA.
15. Farasatkhah, M. (2017). The contingency of university in Iran. Tehran: Agah Publication [in Persian].
16. Farasatkhah, M., Bazargan, A., & Lux, K. (2007). Higher education quality assurance system and socio-cultural contexts: A cognitive map emphasizing the case of Iran. Journal of Social Sciences Letter, 31(1-20) [in Persian].
17. Gharun, M. (1996). Financing universities. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 13 & 14, 97-142 [in Persian].
18. Gharun, M. (2001). An overview of financing higher education in the Asia-Pacific region and approaches for Iran. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 20, 43-64 [in Persian].
19. Goksu, A., & Gokso, G. (2015). Comparative analysis of higher education financing in different countries. Procedia Economics and Finance, 26, 1152 - 1158.
20. Hamzaee, R. (2015). An exploratory analysis of higher education financial challenges and innovations. Journal of Business and Economics, 6(4), 613-624. DOI: 10.15341/jbe (2155-7950)/04.06.2015/001.
21. Huang, F. (2018). Higher education financing in Japan: Trends and challenges. International Journal of Educational Development, 58, 106-115.
22. Jafarzadeh, B. (2014). The relationship between industry and the artery of economic development. The National Conference on Industry-University Interaction [in Persian].
23. Javdani, H. (2015). Designing and validating the policymaking model of the higher education system. Tehran: Institute for Research and Planning of Higher Education [in Persian].
24. Johnstone, D.B. (2002). Challenges of financial austerity: Imperatives and limitations of revenue diversification in higher education. Welsh Journal of Education, 11 (1), 18-36.
25. Johnstone, D.B. (2005). Cost-sharing and the cost-effectiveness of grants and loan subsidies to higher education. In T. Pedro, B. Johnstone, M. J.
26. Jones, G.A. (2002). The structure of university governance in Canada: A policy network approach. In Alberto Amaral, Glen A. Jones and Berit Karseth (ed.) Governing higher education: National perspectives on institutional governance. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 213-234.
27. Kato, H. (1994). Waqf as a system of economic integration. International Islamic Conference, Tokyo, 221-238.
28. Khan Azizi, M. & Amin Beidokhti, A. (2016). Mechanisms for financing education (education & higher education). Quarterly of Higher Education Letter, 9(34), 121-148.
29. Khorsandi Taskooh, A. (2015). An analysis of theoretical foundations and objectives of internationalization of higher education. Iranian Higher Education Journal, 7(3), 27-60 [in Persian].
30. Kohtamäki, V. (2011). How do higher education institutions enhance their financial autonomy? Examples from Finnish Polytechnics. Higher Education Quarterly, 65(2), 164-185. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2273.2010.00475.x.
31. Mahamood, S.M., & Rahman, A. (2015). Financing universities through waqf, pious endowment: Is it possible? Humanomics, 31(4), 430-453.
32. Mahdavi, M. (2007). Pathology of the relationship between university and industry in Iran. Proceedings of the Third International Congress and the Tenth National Congress on Government, University and Industry Cooperation for National Development [in Persian].
33. Mahdi, R. (2015). The status of international higher education in Iran`s comprehensive scientific map. A Monthly Journal of Cultural Engineering, 8(82), 119-132 [in Persian].
34. Noruzi, Kh., Ahmad Abadi, J., Javadi, M., Akbarzadeh, M., & Akbarzadeh, A. (2014). Universities benevolent financing: Identifying requirements and deviations (Case study: Imam Sadiq (a.s.) University). Islamic Finance Research Bi-quarterly Journal, 4(1), 169-198 [in Persian].
35. OECD (2008). Tertiary education for knowledge society. OECD thematic review of tertiary education. Paris, OECD.
36. Rasteh Moghadam, A., & Naderi, A. (2015). Introduction of financial models using to extract lessons for higher education in Iran. Iranian Higher Education, 7(2), 113 [in Persian].
37. Razagh Marandi, H., Rahimzadeh, Kh. & Khaje, O. (2013). Institutional autonomy in the Iranian public universities affiliated with the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology. Iranian Higher Education Journal, 5(4), 137-163[in Persian].
38. Riechi, A.R.O. (2012). Revenue diversification in Kenya’s public universities and implications for efficiency and equity: An analysis of educational finance in the African context. Retrieved on 22 January 2013, from http://ir-library.ku.ac.ke/etd/handle/123456789/2382.
39. Rouhani, Sh., Rahimian, H., AbbasPour, A., Borzooian, S., & GeraeeNejad, Gh. (2019). University revenue diversification: A path to financial stability. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 25(1), 77-95 [in Persian].
40. Rozmus, A., & Cyran, K. (2013). Diversification of university income-polish practice and international Solutions. Financial Internet Quarterly, 8(4), 64-75.
41. Sage, A.P. (1977). Interpretive structural modeling: Methodology for large scale systems. New York, NY: Mc Graw-Hill.
42. Scott, P. (2019). Martin Trow’s elite‐mass‐universal triptych: Conceptualizing higher education development. Higher Education Quarterly, 73, 496-506.
43. Shirmali, A., Soni, V., & Pawar, Sh. (2018). Interpretive structural modeling of identified barriers to lean implementation in SMEs. MATEC Web of Conferences 183, 01008. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201818301008.
44. Sum, N., & Jessop, B. (2013). Competitiveness, the knowledge-based economy and higher education. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 4, 24-44.
45. Teichler, U. (2016). Recent changes of financing higher education in Germany and their intended and unintended consequences. International Journal of Educational Development, Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
46. Teixeira, P., & Koryakina, T. (2013). Funding reforms and revenue diversification-patterns, challenges, and rhetoric. Studies in Higher Education Journal, 38(2), 174-191.
47. Turcan, R.V., & Gulieva, V. (2016). University internationalization and university autonomy: Toward a theoretical understanding. In R.V. Turcan, J. Reilly, & L. Bugaian (Eds.). (Re)Discovering university autonomy: The global market paradox of stakeholder and educational values in higher education. 215-235. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137388728_15
48. Turner, J.R., & Baker, R.M. (2019). Complexity theory: An overview with potential applications for the social sciences. Journal of System. 7 (1), 1-23.
49. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (2016). Institute for Statistics.
50. Varghese, N.V. (2016). Managing markets and massification of higher education in India. Journal of International Higher Education. 86, 13-15.
51. Warfield, J.W. (1974). Developing interconnected matrices in structural modelling. IEEE Transactions on Systems Men and Cybernetics, 4(1),51-81.
52. Webb, J. (2014). The impact of revenue diversification and educational outcomes of private colleges and HLIs during the great recession. unpublished PhD dissertation. The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
53. Williams, S. (2008). Internationalization of the curriculum: A remedy for international students' academic adjustment difficulties? (Doctoral dissertation). Memorial University of Newfoundland.
54. Woodhall, M. (2015). The International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP). Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/iiep
55. Yeager, J., Nelson, G.M., Potter, E.A., Weidman, J.C. & Zullo, T.G. (2001). ASHE reader on finance in higher education. (2nd ed.), Boston: Peatson Custom Publishing.
56. Ying, Y. (2010). SWOT-TOPSIS integration method for strategic decision. Paper presented at the International Conference on E-Business and E-Government. Guangzhou, China.
57. Zakersalehi, Gh. (2013). Study of the legal potentials of academic independence in Iran. Iranian Higher Education Journal, 5(4), 23-55 [in Persian].
)