Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: https://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.739144
Title: Reluctant to lead? : perspectives on academic educational leadership in a research intensive university
Author: Burkill, Susan Margaret
ISNI:       0000 0004 7225 8174
Awarding Body: University of Exeter
Current Institution: University of Exeter
Date of Award: 2017
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
My research explores the leadership challenge faced by contemporary higher education institutions. Globally, the need for high quality academic leadership has never been greater. Yet growing evidence suggests few academics are keen to engage. In this study, I investigate academic educational leadership (AEL) at the University of Exeter (UoE) from organisational and academic perspectives. My purposes are to clarify early career academics’ (ECAs) attitudes and stances towards AEL, what may lie behind these and to make recommendations about how to nurture their future interest in AEL. My study adopts a theoretical and methodological pluralistic approach. Theoretically, I draw on the leadership research of Mats Alvesson and Richard Bolden, relating to organisational culture and structure. In particular, I adapt Alvesson’s model of ‘multiple cultural configurations’. I also draw on the socio-cultural theories of Margaret Archer relating to ‘agentic reflexivity’. Methodologically, I adopt the role of ‘bricoleur’ (Kincheloe, 2001), drawing on an eclectic range of perspectives and principles derived from pragmatism and applied critical realism. By synthesising these, I create a ‘personal enquiry paradigm’. My theoretical research outcomes add to growing evidence about academic ‘defensive routines’ (Martin, 1999). I suggest that ECAs adopt diverse and nuanced attitudes and stances towards AEL, summarized in a ‘reluctance to lead’ typology. I identify a wide range of influential mechanisms and causal powers (M&CPs) which I summarise in an elaborated three dimensional framework. Influential M&CPs include attitudinal dissonance and misalignment between institutional strategies and processes which help explain reluctance. I argue that nurturing future AELs needs to reflect more closely the priorities of ECAs, set in a wider context of institutional cultural reconciliation and strategic realignment. Adopting a normative stance, I provide an example of how this might be possible. My methodological contribution develops through a series of three dimensional frameworks that suggest that multiple configurations of influences operate at different levels and through time at UoE. Overall, my research contributes strongly to the growing body of theories and methodologies investigating higher education cultures. Whilst the case study findings may not be generalizable, other institutions might benefit from some of the insights provided.
Supervisor: Freathy, Robert Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.739144  DOI: Not available
Keywords: Academic Leadership ; Research Intensive Universities ; Applied Critical Realism
Share: