An assessment of the current status of the organizational structure and its dimensions in medical universities for transition to the third generation university | ||
| Future of Medical Education Journal | ||
| مقاله 3، دوره 8، شماره 4، اسفند 2018، صفحه 14-19 اصل مقاله (640.76 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: Original Article | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22038/fmej.2018.34433.1222 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Mohammadreza Raeisoon1؛ Abbas Abbaspour* 2؛ Hamid Rahimian2؛ Ali Khorsandi Taskoh3؛ Samad Borzoian Shirvan3 | ||
| 1PhD Student, Department of Management and Educational Planning, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 2Department of Management and Educational Planning, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| 3Department of Educational Planning and administration, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Allameh Tabatabae'i University, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Background: In today's competitive world, it is hardly possible to achieve strategic goals without having a well-structured organization. Therefore, universities need to focus on improving their organizational structure in order to achieve their goals and sustain their activities. The purpose of this study was to assess the current status of organizational structure dimensions in universities of medical sciences for transition to the third-generation university. Methods: This was a descriptive-analytic study. The statistical population included all managers and healthcare management specialists in universities of medical sciences of the 9th Planning Macro-Region of the country totaling 614 individuals. Using Cochran’s formula, 265 people were selected randomly via stratified random sampling method. To collect data, a researcher-made questionnaire was used, which held 52 items on the 5-point Likert scale. The questionnaire was confirmed by faculty members in terms of formal and content validity, and its reliability was obtained through Cronbach's alpha coefficient as 0.95. SPSS14 software and descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data. Results: The results showed that the mean scores for all structural dimensions in the universities of medical sciences were lower than average (score=3) in the present situation, including informal relationships (2.43 ± 0.63), trust-based relationships (2.57 ± 0.61), interaction-based relationships (2.52 ± 0.49), emotion-based relationships (2.72 ± 0.54), formalization (2.82 ± 0.64), complexity (2.99 ± 0.52), concentration (2.83 ± 0.49), and professionalism (2.90 ± 0.50). These relationships were statistically significant (p = 0.0001). Conclusion: According to the results, universities of medical sciences require a fundamental change in their current organizational structure in order for transition to the third-generation university. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Organizational structure؛ Transition to third generation university؛ University of medical sciences | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
1- Nemati MA, Mohammadi Y, Raeisoon MR. Relationship between knowledge management and educational performance of faculty members. Educ Strategy Med Sci. 2015; 8 (4):203-8. Persian.
2- Vatankhah N, Rezai Moghaddam K. Components and barriers of the college of entrepreneurship establishment from the perspective of cooperative member and non-member students of Shiraz University. Scientific and Research Quarterly Journal of Co-Operation and Agriculture 2015; 4(15):17-40. Persian.
3- Gholipour Solymani A, Talebi kelidbari S. University and entrepreneurship features [Internet]. 2010 [updated 2010 Oct 20; cited 2017 Apr 14]. Available from: http://marketingarticles.ir/ArtBank/KARAFARINY.pdf
4- Torkzadeh J, Dehghan Harati F. Developing and validating a scale to assess organizational behavior foundations. Mediterr J Soc Sci. 2016; 7(6):61-71.
5- Kalay F, Lynn GS. The impact of organizational structure on management innovation: an empirical research in Turkey. Journal of Business Economics and Finance 2016; 5(1):125-37.
6- Ayers D, Dahlstrom R, Skinner SJ. An exploratory investigation of organizational antecedents to new product success. J Mark Res. 1997; 34(1):107–16.
7- Strese S, Meuer MW, Flatten TC, Brettel M. Organizational antecedents of cross-functional coopetition: The impact of leadership and organizational structure on cross-functional coopetition. IND MARK MANAG. 2016; 53:42-55.
8- Miles RE, Snow CC. Organization theory and supply chain management: an evolving research perspective. Journal of Operations Management 2007; 25(2):459-63.
9- Kordnaiej A, Ahmadpour M, Shams S. Designing the organizational structure of entrepreneurship centers and schools. Quarterly Journal of Humanities 2005; 9(2):119-56. Persian.
10- Mintzberg, H. Structure in 5 designing effective organizations. Faghihi A, Vaziri Sabeghi H, translators. Publications Center for Public Administration Education; 2016.
11- Jofreh M, Baba Beik R. Conflict Management Strategies and Organizational Structure, Quarterly Journal of Business Management 2010; 6(2):189-213. Persian.
12- Aghajani HA, Alizadeh R. Organic or mechanical evaluation of existing organizational structure of Islamic Azad University, Noshahr and Chalus Branch, and determining the preferred structure from employees perspective. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research 2004; 4(12):13-40. Persian.
13- Izadi Yazdan Abadi A, Behrangi MR. Evaluation and analysis of the organizational structure of Tarbiat Moallem University" A comparison between status Quo and satisfactory situation". Quarterly Journal of Research and Planning in Higher Education 2006; 12 (2):23-38. Persian.
14- Marshale S, Maureen LA, Russell SC. The effect of organizational structure on perceptions of procedural fairness. J Appl Psychol. 2000; 85(2):294-304.
15- Katsikea E, Theodosiou M, Perdikis N, Kehagias J. The effects of organizational structure and job characteristics on export sales managers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. J World Business 2011; 46 (2):221–33.
16- Kezar A, Eckel P. The effect of institutional culture on change strategies in higher education: universal principles or culturally responsive concepts? J Higher Educ. 2002; 73(4):435-60.
17- Faramarzinia Z, Farhadi Rad H, Mehralizadeh Y. Analysis of the feasibility of implementing an entrepreneurial university model: a case study of Shahid Chamran University . Iranian Journal of Engineering Education 2016; 18(71):65-86. Persian.
18- Monavarian A. The development structural components in fit with knowledge management approach. Information Technology Management 2011; 3(7):113-30. Persian.
19- Mortazai H, Salehi M, Niaz Azari K. Identify factors affecting the organizational structure dimensionin entrepreneurial university and its role in creating a knowledge-based economy. Quarterly Professional Journal of Social Sciences 2018; 12 (41): 31-60. Persian.
20- Mohammadi Kangarani H, Ghonchepour D. Delineation and analysis of intra organizational formal and informal relationships through network analysis (Case study: Natural resources organization of Hormozgan province). Iranian Journal of Forest 2013; 1(5):43-53. Persian.
21- Bagheri M, Dehnad H. Comparison of the effect of informal communications on effective communication in the organization, at two levels of operational and excellence. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Modern Research in Management - Economics and Accounting, 2015 Nov 16; Tehran, Iran. Available from: http://scholar.conference.ac/ index.php/download/ file/3238
22- Claver S, Zaragoza-Sa´ez P, Pertusa O. Organizational structure features supporting knowledge management processes. Journal of Knowledge Management 2007; 11(4): 45-57.
23- Davidsson P. The domain of entrepreneurship research: Some suggestions. In: Katz J, Shepherd D, editors. Cognitive Approaches to Entrepreneurship Research (Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth, Volume 6) Emerald Group Publishing Limited; 2003.
24- Aghababaei R, Rahimi H. The study of structural aspects of knowledge-based organizations in Kashan University of Medical Sciences. Research in Medical Education [Internet]. 2016; 8(2):1-8. Available from:
25- Wissema, JG. Towards the third generation university: Managing the university in transition. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2009.
26- Jadidi R, Memari F, Anbari Z. The relationship between organizational structure and organizational intelligence in teaching hospitals of Arak University of Medical Sciences. J Arak Uni Med Sci. 2013; 16(8):21-31. Persian.
27- Yadollahi Farsi J, Zali MR, Bagheri SM. Recognizing affective structural factors on developing academic entrepreneurship; The case of University of Applied Science and Technology. Journal of Science & Technology Policy 2011; 4(1): 17-23. Persian.
28- Bernardo, A. Hierarchical structure and search in complex organizations. Manage Sci. 2010; 56(5): 831-48.
29- Vaezi R, Sabzikaran E. Relationship between organizational structure and personnel empowerment in NIOPDC-Tehran area. Research Transformation Management. 2010, 2(3):153-78. Persian.
30- Nasiri Velik Bani F, Shaygani Manie S. The relationship between organizational structure and organizational development. Journal of Evolution Development Management 2016; 1(26):45-51. Persian. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,104 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 454 |
||