AN EFFECT OF UNIVERSITY LEADER’S CONFIDENCE ON THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A UNIVERSITY
Abstract
The conditions of the traditional resources limitation compel the universities to improve their efficiency by means of transition from extensive to intensive development, i.e. by using the internal resources.The purpose of the article is the analysis of the situations when the effectiveness of a university is mostly determined by the socio-psychological determinants, such as personality of a University head, his (her) characteristics, experience, professional competence, and others. Using the method of logical-psychological analysis the authors have found the most favorable conditions for the University’s effectiveness, when the rector – an official head is also recognized as a leader of a team and characterized by self-confidence as an essential quality of a leader. It is the most important «soft» competence which is relevant for a modern manager. The correlations between certain aspects of the University leader self-confidence and some university resources are revealed. It is concluded that the leadership capacity of the University head is a basic inner resource for University’s effective and stable movement forward. The paper formulates the proposals improve the mechanism of nomination of candidates for position passing interview and examination at the Attestation Commission under the Ministry of education and science of the Russian Federation.
About the Authors
D. A. Endovitskiy
Voronezh State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Economics), Prof., Rector
Yu. A. Bubnov
Voronezh State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Philosophy), Prof., Vice Rector for Strategic Administrative Management, Dean of the Faculty of Philosophy and Psychology
K. M. Gaidar
Voronezh State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dr. Sci. (Psychology), Assoc. Prof., Head of General and Social Psychology Department
References
1. Endovitskiy, D.A., Bubnov, Yu.A., Gaidar, K.M. (2014). [The Increase of Document Flow as a Factor Reducing the Economic Effectiveness of the University]. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii [Higher Education in Russia]. No. 11, pp. 17-24. (In Russ., abstract in Eng.)
2. Golikov, Yu.A., Kostin, A.N. (1996). [Intersystem Interactions Research Problems]. In: Sistemnye issledovaniya. Metodologicheskie problemy. Ezhegodnik. 1992–1994. [System Studies. Methodological Problems. Yearbook]. Moscow: Editorial URSS, pp. 293-316. (In Russ.)
3. Lomov, B.F. (1989). [System Approach to the Problem of Determinism in Psychology]. Psikhologicheskiy zhurnal [Psychological Journal]. Vol. 10. No. 4, pp. 19-33 (In Russ.)
4. Sadovskiy, V.N. (1996). [The Change of Paradigms of System Thinking]. In: Sistemnye issledovaniya. Me-todologicheskie problemy. Ezhegodnik. 1992–1994. [System Studies. Methodological problems. Yearbook]. Moscow: Editorial URSS, pp. 65-78. (In Russ.)
5. Zhuravlyov, A.L. (1990). [Principles of System Approach in the Study of Psychology of Labor Collective]. In: Princip sistemnosti v psikhologicheskikh issledovaniyakh. [The Principle of Consistency in Psychological Research]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., pp. 114-131 (In Russ.)
6. Kupreichenko, A.B., Zhuravlyov, A.L. (2003). Nravstvenno-psikhologicheskaya regulyatsiya ekonomicheskoi aktivnosti [The Moral-Psychological Regulation of Economic Activity]. Moscow: Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 436 p. (In Russ.)
7. Gordeeva, T.O. (2006). Psikhologiya motivatsii dostizheniya. [The Psychology of Achievement Motivation]. Moscow: Smysl Publ.; Akademiya Publ., 336 p. (In Russ.)
8. Shternberg, R. (2000). Intellekt, prinosyashiy uspekh. [Intelligence That Brings Success]. Minsk: Popurri Publ., 368 p. (In Russ.)
9. Zankovskiy, A.N. (2011). Psikhologiya liderstva. Ot povedencheskoi modeli k kul’turno-tsennostnoi para-digme. [The Psychology of Leadership. From Behavioral Model to a Cultural-Value Paradigm]. Moscow: Institute of Psychology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 296 p. (In Russ.)
10. Parygin, B.D. (1993). Rukovodstvo i liderstvo [Management and Leadership]. St. Petersburg: Piter Publ., 216 p. (In Russ.)
11. Andreeva, G.M. (2003). Sotsial’naya psikhologiya. [Social Psychology]. Moscow: Aspekt-Press Publ., 363 p. (In Russ.)
12. Jones, S., Harvey, M., Hamilton, J., Bevacqua, J., Egea, K., McKenzie, J. (2017). Demonstrating the Impact of a Distributed Leadership Approach in Higher Education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. Vol. 39. No. 2, pp. 197-211.
13. Kirkpatricka, S.A., Locke, E.A. (1991). Leadership: do Traits Matter? Academy of Management Executive. Vol. 5. No. 2, pp. 48-60.
14. Lindsley, D.H., Brass, D.J., Thomas, J.B. (1995). Efficacy-Performing Spirals: A Multilevel Perspective. Academy of Management Review. Vol. 20, pp. 645-678.
15. Lafi, S.G., Merkulova, M.S. (2010). [The Readiness to Take Risks as a Factor of Managerial Effectiveness]. Omskie social’no-gumanitarnye chteniya. [Omsk Social Humanitarian Readings]. Omsk: Omsk State Tech. Univ. Publ., pp. 221-225. (In Russ.)
Review
Views:
348
Email this article 