【作者】 梁燕玲；

【导师】 张应强；

【作者基本信息】 华中科技大学 ， 高等教育学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 民办普通高校在发展中一直面临着两种严峻挑战:一个是系统强大的传统拉力,会造成民办高校发展的“组织趋同”。在不断吸取各种社会资源、政府资源、市场资源的同时,这些资源所附带的文化传统也进入了组织,造成对组织自身文化的冲击。另一种是组织内部资源流动性高、利益分散,会造成民办高校发展的“组织离散”。这两个现象反映的是组织自身诉求与资源供给的价值冲突。解决这个问题,意味着两种努力:一是坚持自我。将领导者自身的信念与追求转化为组织的文化诉求,把符号展开为组织生活图景,引发组织成员的自觉行动;二是超越自我。提高资源获取能力,增强组织生命力。于是,那些成功组织自然吸引了更多关注。它们如何在传统和现代、理想与现实、内部与外部、个体与组织之间寻找平衡?这些问题在民办普通高校组织内部的具体表现如何?它们解决问题的方式、途径如何?这是本研究试图回答的问题。本研究改变大学文化与企业文化冲突的传统研究框架,返回研究起点,解答“民办高校组织文化是什么”的问题。为此,将多案例文化人类学研究和个案研究相结合,通过长期、反复的现场观察和访谈等方法,从两条路径对民办高校组织文化进行描述和分析:一是建立了“人物、符号、制度”之“三要素”文化描述框架,通过故事、景观、仪式、典礼、活动、行话等情节刻画,呈现民办高校组织文化现状。在此基础上,建立“人物、符号、制度、气氛、资本”之“五要素”文化研究框架,采用个案研究方法,描述组织发展与组织内部角色关系变化的对应关系。通过个体文化心理分析,展现组织在外部制度供给与自我意识之间的动态平衡,从而揭示组织文化的演进路线:从“学生共同体”向“职业结合体”的转变。二是研究组织中的“人”:按照各自在组织中的位置、地位、权力,可以将民办高校组织内部个体区分为领导者、管理者、教师、学生等不同角色。角色关系的转变表现在两个方面:一个是学生。“服务学生、教育学生、管理学生”是组织发展的宗旨。因此,直接影响学生学习的教学设施、教学管理和校园环境一直是这些组织内部管理的重点。另一个是教师。“聘用授课制”使教师成为这类组织发展的一种市场资源。教师专业发展等问题连同单位制度的废除也一并消解。对于少量的专职教师来说,合同制以及专业发展困扰、成就感缺乏和组织内部的疏离感,都使得这类组织远离着被学界视为根基的所谓“学术力量”。与前二者相较,管理人员和领导者还是组织内部强势的文化力量。他们的关系更多演绎着官僚等级制文化传统。目前看来,民办高校组织内部个体力量悬殊较大:教师是游离、边缘的角色。学生对组织发展的影响多限于技术层面。管理者的资本存储也不足以影响组织的进程。这种情况下,领导者成为这些组织的核心。他们的个人性格都对应着迥异的领导风格,从而塑造着组织鲜明的文化性格。“拓荒型”的领导者,善于鼓动、激发组织成员的精神力量,却常疏于有效的制度建设。“分析型”的领导者,面对、处理组织问题时更注重实效,在建立组织愿景、使命感方面则显乏力。“和谐型”的领导者,善于发现和利用新资源,在形成组织特色方面则显不足。从文化看这类组织,发现的是个性,肯定的是精神,他们贡献的是独立和公正。它们的文化可能在于从高等教育系统发展着眼,直面中国传统精神和现代工商业文明之根本价值冲突,在人类文明进程之传统与现代、新与旧的文化冲突中寻找自己的通路。在长时间内,领导力将依然是民办高校组织生命力的基本命题。为此,保持和完善自己的文化性格是一方面,关键在于制度建设。它不仅是组织历史成就、精神与组织生命力的相互转换,也是民办普通高校组织文化演进的节点。更多还原

【Abstract】 Minban higher education institutions (MHEIs) are always confronted with two austere challenges: one is the powerful pull of system which is leading to an“identified organization tendency”of these MHEIs—when continuously assimilating various sorts of social resources, government resources and market resources, the incidental culture of these resources come to organization simultaneously which would impinge the already existent culture of the MHEIs; the other is the dispersion of inner organization interest and the fluidity of inner organizational resources generating“organization dispersant”. In fact, the conflict between the resource supply and the request of MHEI itself is revealed. The two perspectives are proved to be helpful to face the above challenges: one is to hold their own culture request and their own dreams which should be established to a whole picture and a set of organizational behavior. The other is to develop the organizational vitality by absorbing necessary resources. How do these problems act concretely in the organizations? What’s the solution to them? Are there any hidden troubles? All these are concerned in this research.This research changed the design from the traditional perspective of organizational conflict between entrepreneurial culture and university culture perspective to the organization itself. As a starting point,the research focused on the question: what is the organizational culture of MIHE. The description and analysis of cultural condition inside organization follows two clues: one is multi-cases anthropology research, which depicts stories, sight, ritual, ceremony, activity, jargon and etc to present the developmental conditions in the MIHEs. Furthermore, adopting the method of case study to reveal the parallel nexus between organizational development and relation transformation of the organizational actors; and evolving path of organizational culture: the moving balance between adhering to organizational ideal and utilizing traditional resources. The other is the study of the characters inside the organizations: leaders, managers, teachers and students. Transformation of role connection lies in two parts: one is the students, the vitals of organizational development are“serving the students, educating the students and managing the students”. Therefore teaching establishment, teaching management and campus environment, that directly affect students’learning, are always the pivots of the inner organizational management. The other is teachers, the“teacher-engaged”mode make teachers a kind of market resources for these organizations. The problem of teachers’specialty development, along with the abolishment of the unite system, is cleared up. The full time teachers are absorbed in embarrassment of specialty development by the contract system. They always feel lack of accomplishment and estrangement of inner organization. Compared with the former two, for the moment, manager and leaders are the most powerful cultural actors inside organization. Their relationships are more to deduct the bureaucratic cultural tradition.Leaders are no doubt the key figures in these organizations, whose leading styles corresponding individual characters are shaping a cultural character with vivid organization. Those“initiative leaders”who are good at agitating and inspiring organizational members ignore the establishment of effective system. Those“analyzing leaders”who pay more attention to actual effect when facing and resolving the organizational problems, fall to set up organizational willing and obligation. Those“sensible leaders”who are likely to find and utilize new resources are showing deficiency on forming organizational features.In the cultural perspective of these organizations, we can discover the personality and affirm the spirit and the independence and justice devoted by them. There is the possibility that their culture lies in the direct confrontation with the ultimate value conflict between traditional Chinese spirit and modern industry and commerce civilization with the view to the development of higher education system and it is trying to find a way through the conflict. As a special cultural life, the essential element of general colleges and universities run by local people is to set up its institution system which contains regulation system and unambiguous sign token system to express its ideal exactly and adapt itself to the reality.It means that institution construction will be crucial to the evolution of the culture of these organizations.更多还原