بررسی عوامل ‌مؤثر بر یکپارچه‌سازی واحد‌های پشتیبانی و منابع انسانی مراکز آموزش عالی

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران، ایران

2 استادیار، دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران، ایران

3 دانشیار، دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران، ایران

چکیده

هدف از انجام این پژوهش بررسی عوامل موثر بر یکپارچه‌سازی واحدهای سازمانی در فضای دانشگاهی، به طور خاص یکپارچه‌سازی واحد «پشتیبانی» با واحد «منابع انسانی» می‌باشد. در مبانی نظری یکپارچه‌سازی، به یکپارچه‌سازی دو واحد پشتیبانی و منابع انسانی کمتر پرداخته شده است. به ویژه به نظر می‌رسد این موضوع در فضای دانشگاهی با ویژگی‌های خاص خود مانند نوع رهبری، ساختار حاکمیت، ذی‌نفعان و فرهنگ متفاوت نسبت به سایر سازمان‌ها، نیاز به تحقیقات بیشتری دارد. این پژوهش با رویکرد کیفی در یکی از دانشگاه‌های تهران انجام شده است. برای پاسخ به سوالات تحقیق، 23 مصاحبه‌ نیمه‌ساختار یافته با متخصصان این حوزه، مدیران ارشد و میانی فعلی و پیشین این دو واحد و سایر افراد کلیدی مرتبط که با روش گلوله برفی انتخاب شده‌اند انجام گرفته و نتایج با روش تحلیل مضمون استخراج شده است. پنج مضمون اصلی که نشان‌دهنده عوامل مؤثر بر  یکپارچه‌سازی دو واحد مذکور در فضای دانشگاهی هستند شناسایی شده‌اند که شامل «همراهی مدیران و مسئولین در سطوح مختلف با طرح یکپارچه‌سازی»، «فرهنگ و ارزش‌های موجود»، «قوانین و رویه‌های اداری دانشگاه»، «ساختار» و «توافق عام» می‌باشند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating factors affecting the integration of support departments and human resources of higher education centers

نویسندگان [English]

  • Sharareh Kalantari Dehaghi 1
  • Misagh Tasavori 2
  • Manchoochehr Najmi 3
1 MA Graduated, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
3 Associate Professor, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

 Introduction: The importance of successful integration has been emphasized in prior literature. In fact, it has been shown that internal integration of different departments in an organization can remove duplication among different activities, improve efficiencies, and consequently enhance firm performance. If proper integration is going to happen, different departments should focus on the key objectives of organizations and work together to share information, prioritize activities, and plan for achieving these objectives. However, previous literature has revealed that the successful integration of two departments that are well established and might be pursuing apparently different goals will be challenging. In fact, some studies have revealed that the integration of two different departments will usually fail.
In this research, we focus on the integration of two departments at a university. The context of the university has been selected as universities are also faced with uncertainties and in order to survive and be successful, they have to deploy solutions to enhance their efficiencies. Prior studies have demonstrated that any attempts to better integrate the skills and knowledge of employees can support organizations to better utilize their resources, benefit from competitive advantage and, consequently, enhance their efficiency and performance. On the other hand, universities play a pivotal role in training students, the progress of research, and consequently, economic development. As a result, the enhancement of efficiencies can be important in these organizations. Integration in organizations is a very complicated phenomenon that can be impacted by several factors such as culture, structure, formal or informal relationships, as well as cross-functional relationships. Considering the unique characteristics of universities such as their culture, stakeholders, leadership, and structure, conducting research in these contexts can offer new insights into the integration literature. Prior research has also corroborated that there is limited understanding of the factors supporting or inhibiting the successful integration of departments in an organization, especially in specific contexts.
In this research, we focus on the integration of two departments, Support Services and Human Resources. Previous studies have shown that several universities in Iran have merged these two departments. As a result, learning about the key factors that might contribute to or prevent successful integration would be valuable. The research question of this study can be thus stated: "What are the key factors that impact the successful
integration of the two departments of Support Services and Human Resources in a university?"
Methodology: Due to the nature of the research and our goal to provide an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon, qualitative research was adopted. To better understand the context of a university, we adopted a single case study approach. The data was collected through semi-structured interviews and observations from a university in Iran. Based on the reviewed literature, an interview guideline was designed. 23 interviews were conducted with senior executives, middle managers, and other knowledgeable individuals, such as former senior and middle managers. Snowball sampling was used to choose interviewees. Data collection continued until theoretical saturation was reached. Interviews were recorded and then transcribed. Thematic analysis was employed to evaluate semi-structured interviews. Several factors impacting the integration of Support Services and Human Resources departments were extracted in the first step, then classified into categories and subcategories, and finally, themes were determined.
Results and Discussion: The data of the interviews were classified into five main themes. The identified factors influencing the successful integration of the two departments of Support Services and Human Resources in a university environment were identified as follows: "cooperation of managers at different levels for the implementation of the integration plan", "existing culture and values", "university administrative rules and procedures", "structure", and "consensus on integration".
Conclusion: The findings of this research contribute to the integration literature by highlighting the key factors that impact the successful integration of the two departments of Support Services and Human Resources in a university. Our findings also add to the higher education literature by shedding light on the factors that should be taken into account in the integration procedure in a university, which can enhance the efficiency of a university. The findings of this research also have valuable practical implications for the top managers of universities who may want to integrate two departments, particularly Support Services and Human Resources.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Organizational integration
  • Organizational change
  • Human resources department
  • Support services department
  1. Ahmady, G. A., Mehrpour, M., & Nikooravesh, A. (2016). Organizational structure. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 230, 455-462.
  2. Asghar Eskandari, M. G., & Ardalan, R. (2013). Knowledge leadership, organizational intelligence and organizational effectiveness. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 3(12), 71-100. [In Persian] http://www.smsjournal.ir/article_88829_129d1227bfbcc350d179c477a7e42238.pdf
  3. Ashkenas, R. (2015). There’s a difference between cooperation and collaboration. Harvard Business Review, 20.
  4. Bleiklie, I. (2007). Systemic integration and macro steering. Higher Education Policy, 20(4), 391-412.
  5. Boyer, K. K., & McDermott, C. (1999). Strategic consensus in operations strategy. Journal of Operations Management, 17(3), 289-305.
  6. Carter, M. Z., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., & Mossholder, K. W. (2013). Transformational leadership, relationship quality, and employee performance during continuous incremental organizational change. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(7), 942-958.
  7. Clark, T., Foster, L., Sloan, L., & Bryman, A. (2021). Bryman's social research methods. Oxford University Press.
  8. Davies, M., & Buisine, S. (2018). Innovation culture in organizations. Science, Technology and Innovation Culture, 101-115. Wiley. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119549666.ch6
  9. Ellinger, A. E., Keller, S. B., & Hansen, J. D. (2006). Bridging the divide between logistics and marketing: facilitating collaborative behavior. Journal of Business Logistics, 27(2), 1-27.
  10. Fakhrossadat Nasiri, R. B. (2014). Investigated the intelectual capital and labor productivity. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 5(19), 55-76. [In Persian] http://www.smsjournal.ir/article_88752_c74ec8cdcee23004e2dfc2def0c703d3.pdf
  11. Fallatah, M. (2019). Offshoring and organizational innovation: the moderating roles of absorptive capacity and inter-functional integration. International Business Research, 12(10), 57-62.
  12. Fawcett, A. M., & Fawcett, S. E. (2013). Awareness is not enough. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 43(3), 205-230
  13. Flake, E. (2006). An introduction to qualitative research in the human sciences. In: Translated by A. Jamshidian, A. Siadat, R. Ali Nouroozi, Qom: Sama e Ghalam.
  14. Flynn, B. B., Huo, B., & Zhao, X. (2010). The impact of supply chain integration on performance: A contingency and configuration approach. Journal of Operations Management, 28(1), 58-71.
  15. Frankel, R., & Mollenkopf, D. A. (2015). Cross‐functional integration revisited: Exploring the conceptual elephant. Journal of Business Logistics, 36(1), 18-24.
  16. Ganeshan, R., & Marath, R. K. (2002). Web-enabling the supply chain: an exploratory case study. New Directions in Supply-Chain and Technology Management: Technology, Strategy, and Implementation, New York, NY.
  17. Gill, R. (2002). Change management--or change leadership? Journal of Change Management, 3(4), 307-318.
  18. Gornitzka, Å., & Maassen, P. (2000). Analyzing organizational change in higher education. In F. E. Ragnvald Kalleberg, Grete Brochmann, Arnlaug Leira, Lars Mjøset (Ed.), Comparative Perspectives on Universities (pp. 83-99). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  19. Habib, M., & Jungthirapanich, C. (2010). An empirical study of educational supply chain management for the universities. Informs International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management,
  20. Hansen, M. (2009). Collaboration: How leaders avoid the traps, build common ground, and reap big results. Harvard Business Press.
  21. Hausman, W. H. (2004). Supply chain performance metrics. In The practice of supply chain management: Where theory and application converge, 61-73. Springer, Boston, MA.
  22. Hayes, R. H., & Wheelwright, S. C. (1984). Restoring our competitive edge: competing through manufacturing (Vol. 8). Wiley New York.
  23. Hriri, N. (2011). Principles and methods of qualitative research, Tehran: Islamic Azad University. Science Research Branch.
  24. Johnson, G., Whittington, R., Regnér, P., Angwin, D., & Scholes, K. (2020). Exploring strategy. Pearson UK.
  25. Kezar, A., & Eckel, P. D. (2002). The effect of institutional culture on change strategies in higher education: Universal principles or culturally responsive concepts? The Journal of Higher Education, 73(4), 435-460.
  26. Krajewski, L., & Wei, J. C. (2001). The value of production schedule integration in supply chains. Decision Sciences, 32(4), 601-634.
  27. Lambert, D., & Knemeyer, M. 4 Measuring performance: the supply chain management perspective. Business Performance Measurement, 82-112.
  28. Lekue, J., & Micheal, N. N. (2021). The influence of information technology capability on supply chain integration and marketing performance of downstream petroleum sector in Nigeria. Gusau International Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 4(2), 13-13.
  29. Lozano, R. (2013). Are companies planning their organisational changes for corporate sustainability? An analysis of three case studies on resistance to change and their strategies to overcome it. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 20(5), 275-295.
  30. Mackelprang, A. W., Robinson, J. L., Bernardes, E., & Webb, G. S. (2014). The relationship between strategic supply chain integration and performance: a meta‐analytic evaluation and implications for supply chain management research. Journal of Business Logistics, 35(1), 71-96.
  31. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. sage.
  32. Mintzberg, H. (2007). Tracking strategies: Toward a general theory. Oxford University Press on Demand.
  33. Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 475–480.
  34. Narasimhan, R., & Das, A. (2001). The impact of purchasing integration and practices on manufacturing performance. Journal of Operations Management, 19(5), 593-609.
  35. Narasimhan, R., & Kim, S. W. (2001). Information system utilization strategy for supply chain integration. Journal of Business Logistics, 22(2), 51-75.
  36. Nasiri, H., Yamani Douzi Sorkhabi, M., & Haqani, M. (2018). An analysis of merging effects on academic culture [Original]. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 24(2), 109-134. [In Persian] http://journal.irphe.ac.ir/article-1-3820-en.html
  37. Neda Abdolvand, M. M. S., & Baradaran, V. (2013). Development model of strategic alignment of business and information technology. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 4(14), 125-143. [In Persian] http://www.smsjournal.ir/article_88799_8beeb9add4d0be58a16a78907114725c.pdf
  38. O’Leary-Kelly, S. W., & Flores, B. E. (2002). The integration of manufacturing and marketing/sales decisions: impact on organizational performance. Journal of Operations Management, 20(3), 221-240.
  39. Pagell, M. (2004). Understanding the factors that enable and inhibit the integration of operations, purchasing and logistics. Journal of Operations Management, 22(5), 459-487.
  40. Pagell, M., Handfield, R. B., & Barber, A. E. (2000). Effects of operational employee skills on advanced manufacturing technology performance. Production and Operations Management, 9(3), 222-238.
  41. Pavel, A.-P. (2012). The importance of quality in higher education in an increasingly knowledge-driven society. International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 2(Special 1), 120-127.
  42. Rodrigues, A. M., Stank, T. P., & Lynch, D. F. (2004). Linking strategy, structure, process, and performance in integrated logistics. Journal of Business Logistics, 25(2), 65-94.
  43. Sadr, N. S., Dohaviyan, A., & Malekzadeh, G. (2020). The effect of emotional commitment on employees' resistance to change through attitude and readiness for change. Management Studies (improvement and transformation), 29(96), 101-120. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.22054/jmsd.2020.47213.3439
  44. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. Pearson education.
  45. Schilling, J., & Kluge, A. (2009). Barriers to organizational learning: An integration of theory and research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 11(3), 337-360.
  46. Sinkovics, R. R., Penz, E., & Ghauri, P. N. (2005). Analysing textual data in international marketing research. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 8(1), 9-38.
  47. Stank, T. P., Daugherty, P. J., & Gustin, C. M. (1994). Organizational structure: influence on logistics integration, costs, and information system performance. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 5(2), 41-52.
  48. Stank, T. P., Keller, S. B., & Closs, D. J. (2001). Performance benefits of supply chain logistical integration. Transportation Journal, 41(2/3), 32-46. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20713491
  49. Storberg-Walker, J., & Torraco, R. (2004). Change and Higher Education: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Online Submission.
  50. Storberg-Walker, J., & Torraco, R. (2004). Change and higher education: A Multidisciplinary Approach, Academy of Human Resource Development Austin, TX.
  51. Susan Bahrami, S. R., Yarmohammadian, M. H., & Kazemi, I. (2011). Multiple relationship strategic human resources management and intellectual capital in public university of Isfahan. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 1(4), 87-105. [In Persian] http://www.smsjournal.ir/article_88712_855ce34a81b7344793d3253fab11cabb.pdf
  52. Verma, R., Thompson, G. M., Moore, W. L., & Louviere, J. J. (2001). Effective design of products/services: An approach based on integration of marketing and operations management decisions. Decision Sciences, 32(1), 165-194.
  53. Vickery, S. K., Jayaram, J., Droge, C., & Calantone, R. (2003). The effects of an integrative supply chain strategy on customer service and financial performance: an analysis of direct versus indirect relationships. Journal of Operations Management, 21(5), 523-539.
  54. Wang, L., Luo, J., & Liu, Y. (2021). Agricultural cooperatives participating in vegetable supply chain integration: A case study of a trinity cooperative in China. Plos one, 16(6), e0253668.
  55. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications. Sage.
  56. Yu, W., Zhao, G., Liu, Q., & Song, Y. (2021). Role of big data analytics capability in developing integrated hospital supply chains and operational flexibility: An organizational information processing theory perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 163, 120417.
  57. Zakersalehi, G. (2009). The study of legal and managerial aspects of autonomy of universities [Original]. Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education, 15(3), 79-106. http://journal.irphe.ac.ir/article-1-614-en.html