A Model of dynamics group among university departments: Grounded Theory Approach

Extended Abstract

1-Introduction

These institutes are the foundation and supplier of the desired workforces of other organizations. In order for universities to be able to play their function in the development and progress of the country well, they need prerequisites and requirements of having specialized, committed and dynamic human resources. Therefore, higher education is a highly significant institution in third world countries, both in terms of educating the elite and creating a basis for a society with technology and dynamism, and being the most important intellectual institution that has a great impact on culture, politics and beliefs (Gholami, 2015). One of the most important and influential part in the management of universities is the management of academic departments. Heads of departments are the link between the specialized subsystem of the university and its management subsystem. Hence, they have a particular function in achieving the goals of the university, and higher education centers are directly related to the effectiveness of heads of departments (Birnbaum, 1983).

Regarding the problems and issues of university departments, it can be argued that empirical evidence (Soleimani, 2008., Mohseni Tabrizi et al., 2010, Nadi, 2012) suggest that resistance is felt against group activity in the departments due to individualism among members. For example, in group work, the success of individual is less considered into his personal account and that the culture of individualism dominates the culture of collectivism in the mind of department members. We can also refer to the employment of faculty members in different fields and diverse university centers, which take the opportunity to focus on the activities of the main group. (Soleimani, 2004).

As a result, recognizing group dynamics is essential for heads of departments who deal with human groups, and provides them with valuable information. The related findings provide a solution to the problems in higher education and helps the heads of departments them to do necessary affairs in a better and easier way by the synergy in academic departments. Also, by creating the grounds for participation of faculty members, it improves communication and, considering the satisfaction of some of their spiritual needs, in addition to their job satisfaction, a dynamic and active environment for advancement is provided for achieving higher education goals. According to what was mentioned above, the ultimate objective of this study is to identify the components of group dynamics that affect the members of departments (heads of department, faculty members) and design an appropriate group dynamics model. By this model, it is possible to recognize factors for increasing mutual cooperation, sense of shared responsibility, tendency to similar social institutions, gaining experience and teamwork, particularly in the field of university management. Also by improving the teamwork process, possible consequences of individualism such as tension, conflict and strife could be avoided, and by considering the dynamics of group in the academic community, a suitable academic model could be provided.

2-Method:

The present study was conducted within the framework of a qualitative approach and grounded theory method (systematic approach). Participants in this study were selected based on the rule and principle of theoretical saturation. 28 faculty members and heads of departments of Kurdistan University were selected by purposive sampling. Data collection tool was a semi-structured interview. The data were analyzed using MAXQDA 12 software in three stages of open coding, axial coding and selective coding.

3-Findings:

The main unit of analysis for open coding included concepts. In the axial coding phase, transcripts of interviews were reviewed regularly to find main categories and subcategories. During this coding process, 642 open codes (concepts) and 32 categories were extracted and their characteristics were identified. which were compiled and presented at the university in the form of a paradigm model including the following: causal conditions (head of department’s feeling the need for change; structural reconstruction of the department and the higher education system; leadership style of the head of department; goals, vision and mission of the department; creative conflicts of the department; collaborative interactions of faculty members, self-regulation and self-renewal of faculty members), central phenomenon (faculty members’ social action; common goals and aspirations of faculty members; faculty members’ tendency to change; faculty members’ collective efficiency), contextual conditions (governing context) (Organizational support of heads of department; group synergy of university organizational culture; department flexibility; university organizational structure), dynamic strategies of university departments (improvement of heads of departments; direction and guidance of department; excellence of thoughts and ideas of department members; promoting the social responsibility of faculty members; transformational and transcendental culture of heads of departments; social facilitation of teamwork in the department), mediating or intervening conditions (Administrative procedures of the university, personality characteristics of heads of departments, decision-making style of heads of departments, structural changes of departments, organizational commitment and trust of the members of departments) and group dynamics consequences (quality and effectiveness of the university; creation of active educational groups; strengthening group leadership; maturity and professional development of faculty members; organizational agility and higher education system).

4-Conclusion:

The aim of the present research was to design a group dynamics model of university departments. The results indicated the extraction of 32 general categories (indicators) which were classified as a paradigm model in the form of six comprehensive categories: 1) causal conditions, 2) central phenomena, 3) group dynamics strategies 4) contextual conditions 4) intervening conditions and 6) the consequences of group dynamics which reflect the process of group dynamics of university departments.

Group dynamics is an emerging phenomena within the higher education system that calls for change. A dynamic university department should include a climate within which, students and other group members feel well and know how to find all the necessary learning resources. Students should feel welcomed, encouraged and supported. Faculty members should always model communication strategies that they want their students to use with their peers. This training should be dynamic and the discussion between students and faculty members should be both valid and valuable and be aimed at creating group dynamism between group members and heads of departments in universities (McDaniels et al, 2016).

5-Funding

There is no funding support

6-Authors' contribution:

Abdollah rahimi has planned the general framework of the project, then implemented the project, analyzed the findings and reported the results, and also has the task of submitting the article and correction. Dr. Bijan Abdollahi has collaborated as the guide in developing a theoretical framework, analysis and final conclusions. , and the author is responsible.  Dr. Hassanreza Zeinabadi and Dr. Hossein Abbasian as the First and second advisor professor was in charge of guiding the overall research process. Discussion of findings, review and approval of the final version is approved by the authors.

7-Conflict of interest:

 Authors declared no conflict of interest

8-Acknowledgments

Thanks and appreciation are offered to all colleagues and researchers who helped us with this article.