Validating a Four-Dimensional Power Model for University Autonomy Planning: A Case Study

Document Type : research article

Authors

1 Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran

2 Department of Educational Sciences, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Iran.

10.22080/eps.2026.30806.2394

Abstract

Aim: A rigorous analysis of governance mechanisms in higher education necessitates moving beyond one-dimensional perspectives to address the multiple and often concealed dimensions of power. Accordingly, the primary objective of this study is to identify, configure, and empirically validate a four-dimensional model of power—encompassing structural, network, discursive, and agentic dimensions—within the Iranian academic field, through a focused case study of the University of Kurdistan.
Methodology: This study employed a mixed-methods approach with a concurrent triangulation design. Quantitative data were gathered via a self-developed questionnaire (demonstrating a reliability coefficient of 0.94) administered to a sample of 163 academic stakeholders selected through purposive and convenience sampling. The quantitative component was analyzed using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and inferential statistics, while qualitative data derived from open-ended questions were scrutinized through thematic analysis.
Results: The results of the exploratory factor analysis led to the identification of four primary constructs of power (structural, network, discursive, and agentic), which collectively account for 70.55% of the total variance. Among these dimensions, the structural (explaining 40.75% of the variance) and network (14.25%) constructs were perceived as the most dominant dimensions of power within the academic field. Furthermore, the analysis of variance (ANOVA) results indicated that faculty members' perception of the impact of these two dimensions is significantly stronger than that of students.
Conclusions and suggestions: Findings suggest that bureaucratic obstruction drives academic stakeholders to rely on informal networks as a substitute for formal agency. Addressing this structural duality requires two strategic interventions: the clarification of decision-making protocols and the operational devolution of the administrative hierarchy.
Innovation and originality: This research empirically validates the distinction between network and structural power in Iran’s organizational context. It demonstrates that informal networks act as a compensatory response to bureaucratic failure, rather than a continuation of formal structural frameworks.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Ball, S. J. (2021). The education debate (4th ed.). Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.5456/WPLL.26.1.201
Borgatti, S. P., & Foster, P. C. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management, 29(6), 991–1013. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-2063(03)00087-4
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsptr.2022.28.1.64
Cabrera, N. L., Batchelder, G. D., Oregon, Y. G., & Zamora, E. J. (2025). CRToP: Toward a critical race theory of power in higher education. Race Ethnicity and Education, 28(4), 543–560. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2024.2306380
Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford University Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd d.). SAGE Publications.
Faraji Deh Sorkhi, H., Asadnia, A., Azizi Shamami, M., & Hooshy Al-Sadat, S. A. (2025). Educational Inequality Research: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research Networks and Thematic Clusters in Academic Literature. Journal of Educational Planning Studies, 14(27), 146–169. [In Persian]. https://doi.org/10.22080/eps.2025.28943.2334
Farasatkhah, M. (2019). Academic Ethics: Moral Luck of University Students in Iran. Int. J. Ethics Soc, 1 (1) , 4-8. [In Persian]. https://dor.isc.ac/dor/20.1001.1.26763338.2019.1.1.2.6
Ghaderi, K., Gholami, K., & Maroofi, Y. (2025). Neoliberal-Ideological governmentality: Discursive power and the university in Iran. Iranian Higher Education, 17(2), 82–106.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
Izadi, S., Salehi Omran, E., Alizadeh Sani, M., & Najafi Khajeh Bolaghi, S. (2025). Mapping - Higher Education Institution with an Internationalization Approach in the Iranian Science and Technology System (Current Situation). Journal of Educational Planning Studies, 14(27), 113–145. [In Persian]. https://doi.org/10.22080/eps.2025.29174.2339
Klemenčič, M. (2023). "Chapter 3: A theory of student agency in higher education". In Research Handbook on the Student Experience in Higher Education. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. Retrieved Jan 5, 2026, from https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802204193.00010
Lukes, S. (2021). Power: A radical view (3rd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.
Marginson, S. (2016). Higher education and the common good. Melbourne University Publishing.
Najibi, S. S. , & Khorasani, A. (2023). Pathology of the higher education policy system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Journal of Educational Planning Studies, 11(22), 76-101. https://doi.org/10.22080/eps.2023.24473.2148
Musselin, C. (2021). University governance in meso and macro perspectives. Annual Review of Sociology, 47, 305–325. doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-090320-012708
Pfeffer, J. (1992). Managing with power: Politics and influence in organizations. Harvard Business School Press.
Shattock, M., & Horvath, A. (2020). The governance of British higher education: The state, the university and the role of the laity. Bloomsbury Academic.
Shokrollahi, M. (2025). Social responsibility of the university system,, the missing concept of educational policies and programs. Journal of Educational Planning Studies, 14(27), 28–45. [In Persian]. https://doi.org/10.22080/eps.2025.28408.2305
Strathern, M. (2000). Audit cultures: Anthropological studies in accountability, ethics and the academy. Routledge.
Journal of Educational Planning Studies
Volume 14, Issue 28
March 2026
Pages 301-316

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 16 December 2025
  • Revise Date: 05 January 2026
  • Accept Date: 12 January 2026

Share

How to cite

Statistics