EDU702

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

THE PERCEPTIONS AND READINESS OF NON-ACADEMIC ADMINISTRATORS ON THE

EMPOWERMENT STRATEGY: CASE STUDY OF ‘LET THE MANAGERS MANAGE (LeTMMe)’ IN UiTM

Prepared by :

Imran Mohamed @ Ismail 2010619886

ED775/02

Prepared for :

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Izaham Shah Ismail

APRIL 2011

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Universiti Teknologi MARA is known as the largest public university in

Malaysia with current enrolment of 180,000 students (including part timers

and allied colleges). The university also hires more than 10,000 academicians

in order to deliver its curriculum. In order to manage such this big population,

the University has to appoint some academicians to uphold certain

administration positions.

From the other view, it seems like those „expert‟ are not in their

optimising position when they have to forgone on preaching the knowledge in

order to perform this administration duties. Due to this situation, University is

currently practice a big tutorial group consisting about 40 students and

recruiting part time lecturers in order to cater the shortages. This big group of

tutorial and part time lecturers tend to compromise with the quality expectation

of the University.

Various system, policies and procedures were tested and reviewed, to

find tune for the best to be implemented in the University since year 2000.

Online records have been tremendously applies in the most of the daily

operations to accelerate the work process. In 2008 and 2009, a serious

discussion have be raised on empowering the non-academic administrators to

office some of the administrations work which currently done by

academicians. In late 2009, „Let the Manager‟s Manage (LeTTMMe)‟ is tabled

to the University Management perusal.

In 2010, a few campuses (Segamat, Seri Iskandar, Dungun and

Samarahan) were instructed to pilot-test this idea, before it will be applied to

the whole University‟s system. This idea was collaborated with the UiTM

autonomous state campus agenda.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

The University‟s is going bigger and the need for academicians is

getting crucial. In meantime, some academicians are doing administrative

jobs, which reducing their teaching hours. This situation made the shortage of

academicians getting worse.

To encounter the problem, the University plans to empower more task

and responsibilities to non-academic administrator (in this case, Assistant

Registrars) to run the administration and daily operation. The academicians

will (still) hold a very minimum administrative position, but will focus more on

academic matters. The administrators will be empowered to uphold top

administrative positions (for example in Students‟ Affairs, Intake, Sport

Centre, Health Centre).

The questions raise whether the Assistant Registrars are capable to

take this responsibility or not. This study will look into the readiness and

perceptions of the Assistant Registrars to deploy this empowerment initiative,

as well as to look into their perceptions on University‟s preparation on it.

1.3 Purpose of the Study

a. To look into administrator‟s perceptions on this empowerment

initiative (implementing LeTMMe).

b. To identify the advantages and disadvantages of implementing

LeTMMe to the University from non-academic administrators

(Assistant Registrars) perspective.

c. To determine either administrators and/or UiTM are ready with

staffing, training and tools to implement LeTTMe.

1.4 Research Questions

a. What are the perceptions of Assistant Registrars towards this

empowerment initiative?

b. What are the advantages and disadvantages of LeTMMe from

Assistant Registrars perspective?

c. Does UiTM and the administrators (ARs) ready to implement

LeTMMe?

1.5 Limitations and Delimitations

1.5.1 Limitation

1.5.1.1 Time constraint

As the research will be conducted during the very limited time-

line, it will be narrow down to the readiness and perception

among the group of Assistant Registrars only.

1.5.1.2 The LeTMMe is currently put on hold.

Due to the latest development and management policy, this

initiative is currently put on hold from the practice. It is also due

to the government ruling of not issuing any new warrant for

administrative post until further notice (expecting of no new

warrant till year 2012).

1.5.2 Delimitation

The study only focuses on readiness and perception of non-

academic administrators and the respondents are all Assistant

Registrars in Academic Affairs Department in the UiTM system.

1.6 Significance of the Study

This study will be very useful for Academic Affairs Division of UiTM to

underline the needs and oversee the forecasted issues before taking

LeTTMMe into practice. This study is also useful for the University

administrators in ensuring the skills and knowledge needed are in hands

before the full implementation take place.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Many researchers have defined “empowerment” in various ways. Kanter

(1977) defines empowerment as giving power to people who are at a

disadvantaged spot in the organization. She sees a continuum of power from

powerlessness to be empowered. Continuing in this tradition, (Block 1987),

Sullivan (1994) and Sullivan and Howell (1996) also focus on the role of the

manager in empowering employees. This perspective suggests that an

empowered organization is one where managers supervise more people than in

a traditional hierarchy and delegate more decisions to their subordinates

(Malone, 1997). Managers act like coaches and help employees solve problems.

Employees, he concludes, have increased responsibility. Superiors empowering

subordinates by delegating responsibilities to them leads to subordinates who are

more satisfied with their leaders and consider them to be fair and in turn to

perform up to the superior‟s expectations (Keller and Dansereau, 1995).

In education field which is totally depend on the intangible product, the service

is totally important to satisfies the customer (students).So that giving

empowerment to the non-academic administrator would help to increase the

customer‟s satisfaction first: when academician can give their solely effort on

teaching to students and second when non academic administrator has full

autonomy to provide excellent service to main customer‟s (students). Looy et al

(2003) describes empowerment is a means of providing service employees with

enough autonomy to allow them handle unforeseen situations such as complaints

The management of university is trying hard to be more effective and efficient

with implementing the concept of “Let the Manager Manage” to their

management style. According to Drucker (1980) overall effectiveness of the

organization is based on the autonomy of the individual worker and the worker‟s

effectiveness is linked to the freedom provided within the organizational climate

of the system.

The university plan to empower most of administration works to the non-

academic administrators will help the administrator to increase their job

effectiveness as well as increasing their positive attitudes in performing their

works. Kallenberg (1977) argues that degrees of autonomy moderate the way the

individual perceives other positive attributes of the job. According to David Collin

(1995), the implication of the process of empowerment will lead to clear and

desirable gains for both managers and workers.

There are few consideration taken for the planning of transferring the

autonomy of certain fields from professional educator (as what happen now) in

university to the non academic educator. According to Grace (1997), the problem

of providing autonomy to the professional educator is based on the inherent

conflict between professionalization and bureaucratization. This statement

supports the reason of university‟s management to switch most of the autonomy

in decision making from academic administrators to non academic administrators.

Switching from academic administration to non academic administration in

university is important as to switch from personal autonomy to team based

autonomy. According to Pastor (1996), personal empowerment, i.e. that which

individuals are responsible for doing for themselves in order to feel empowered in

their lives regardless of circumstances. In the view of university administration,

the personal empowerment involve the head of department in different faculty

that lead more to personal empowerment because they are responsible more on

their own department and they will see the scope of their power based on their

experience in their only department. Weick (1976) for example said that

educational systems are loosely coupled and, as a result, individuals operate

independently more than in groups (English, 1986). However there is also some

of the previous researcher who believe that autonomy by professional educator is

appropriate practice for education management. Professionalism in teaching is

characterized by a control of one‟s destiny (autonomy) and appropriate practice

rather than the conformity and standardized practice that bureaucratic

organizational approaches demand (Darling-Hammond, 1985).

According to Matthias (2002) the decisions-making competence of the central

board as a representative of the overall university must be strength en in relation

to disciplines in times of scarce resources and ever increasing societal demands

on the university. Only empowered central board is able to overcome the

particularistic interest of the single discipline which stands in the way of strategic

reorientation. Matthias (2002) also stress that only empowered central board is

able to overcome the particularistic interest of the single discipline which stand in

the way of strategic orientation. Based on Matthias research on Gottingen

University, the empowerment to the central administration must be increase so

that the problem or particularistic interest of single discipline can be overcome.

As near what happen in Malaysia University when the power is laying more on

subunit department the contradiction of management style between department

will also given impact to the strategic planning of the university which make this

organization become harder to make continues improvement. Another researcher

is agree that people sometimes acting autonomously when the situation is

appropriate with them, for example in university when it involve their department

which means that educator who managed most probably will became

autonomously using their power in helping their only department. Meyers (1986)

suggests that autonomous behaviour occurs in degrees (i.e. given certain

situations, people will act more or less autonomously). He added that to have the

ability to act autonomously does not guarantee that the behaviour will occur;

individuals will only act autonomously if the situation is appropriate to them.

Non academician administrator should be given the authority to manage their

department as the management in profit organization to increase the organization

effectiveness and to remain competitive. Matthias (2002), arguing that significant

increases in competitiveness and self management can be made even in a

formally state-controlled environment. When an organization employs only

hardnosed approaches where workers are denied autonomy, they become

frustrated and professional growth is limited (Wildman and Niles,1987). Both of

the researchers also added that individual autonomy is therefore crucial to the

success of the educational reform movement.

Overall effectiveness of the organization is based on the autonomy of the

individual worker and that worker‟s effectiveness is linked to the freedom

provided within the organizational climate of the system ,Grace(1997).

Autonomy in university to be switch to the non academic administrator is crucial

to educational effectiveness besides overcome the problem of unbalanced power

between central administration and subunit department as mention by previous

researcher.

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Sampling

The population of this research will be among Assistant Registrars of

Academic Affairs Department, in all faculties and campuses. The total

population is expected to be around 80 respondents. Thus, the whole

population will be selected to participate in this study.

3.2 Instrumentation

Questionnaire and interview will be used as the instrumentation to

gather the data needed for this study. The questionnaire will be divided

into two sections which section A consists of demographic data of the

respondents, while section B consists of the predetermine attribute to

check the respondents perception and readiness towards LeTMMe.

Interview session will also be conducted with some of the Assistant

Registrars. In extension, some Rector / Dean / Academic Affairs Division

personnel will also be interviewed to get the perceptions and expections

on LeTTMMe empowerment initiative.

3.3 Data Collection

Questionnaire will be distributed to all Assistant Registrars in all

faculties and campuses through email. The respondents are required to

answer it and reply back to the researcher through the email. Since the

respondents will be identified earlier and some rapport will be made prior

to the research, it is expected that almost 100% respondents will return the

questionnaire.

Interview session is planned to be conducted during the data collection

period.

3.3 Data Analysis

The data obtained from the questionnaire will be analysed by using

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 14.0. The

result will be shown in percentages, frequencies and correlation.

References Bart Van Looy, Paul Gemmel, Roland Van Dierdonck, (2003). Services

Management; An Integrated Approach. Great Britain: Pearson Education Limited.

2nd edition.

Block, P. (1987), “The Empowered Manager: Positive Political Skills at Work”,

Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1985), “Valuing Teachers: The Making of A Profession”,

Teachers College Record, Vol. 87 No. 2, pp. 205-18.

Drucker, P. (1980), Managing in Turbulent Times, Harper & Row, New York, NY.

English, F.W. (1986), “Who Is In Charge Of The Curriculum?”, in Walberg, H.J. and

Keefe, J.W. (Eds), Rethinking Reform: The Principal‟s Dilemma, National

Association of Secondary School Principals, Reston, VA, pp. 25-30

Grace Marie Dondero, Organizational Climate and Teacher Autonomy: Implications

For Educational Reform International Journal of Educational Management 11/5

[1997] 218–221

Joan Pastor, Empowerment: What It Is and What It Is Not. Empowerment in

Organizations, Vol. 4 · No. 2 · 1996, pp. 5–7 © MCB University Press · ISSN 0968-

4891

Kallenberg, A.L., "Work Values and Job Rewards: A Theory of Job Satisfaction",

American Sociological Review, Vol. 42, 1977, pp. 124-43.

Kanter, R.M. (1977), Men and Women of the Corporation, Basic Books, New York,

NY.

Keller, T. and Dansereau, F. (1995), “Leadership and Empowerment: A Social

Exchange Perspective,” Human Relations, Vol. 48 No. 2, Pp. 127-46.

Malone, T.W. (1997), “Is Empowerment Just A Fad? Control, Decision Making, And

IT,” Sloan Management Review, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 23-9.

Matthias Kreying (2002) ,Journal of Education Administration, Vol 40, No.6 2002, pp

552-560 MCV UP Limited, 0957-8234.DO1 10.11081 0957823021

Meyers, C. (1986), “Freedom, Autonomy, And Responsibility: An Analysis Of

Autonomy In Applied Settings”, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University Of

Tennessee, Knoxville, TN.

Sullivan, K. and Howell, J.L. (1996), Wide Awake in Seattle: Success Stories of

Outstanding Leaders Who Learned to Share Leadership, Integrity Publishing,

Seattle, WA.

Weick, K.E. (1976), “Educational Organizations As Loosely Coupled Systems”,

American Science Quarterly, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 1-19.

Wildman, T.M. And Niles, J.A. (1987), “Essentials of Professional Growth”,

Educational Leadership, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 4-10.