chapter 9

COURSENOTES

COURSE TITLE: MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP IN EDUCATION

COURSE CODE: EPB2033

PREPARED BY: TENGKU NOORAINUN TENGKU SHAHDAN

COURSE: EPB2033: MANAGEMENT AND LEADERSHIP IN EDUCATIONFACULTY: EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

TOPIC 9: Shared Decision Making: Empowering Teachers

(Textbook Chapter 10)

9.0 Introduction

This topic will explain shared the decision and empowered teachers. The topic also covers two models of shared decision making: one based on a comprehensive set of decision rules (Vroom & Yetton, 1973) and the other on simple set of three criteria a) expertise b) relevance, and c) trust in subordinates.

9.0.1 Overview

Under what conditions should subordinates be involved in decision making? When

and how should teachers be empowered? How should the decision make group be structured and function? What is the role of the leader in participative leadership?

9.1 Key Contents

9.1.1 The Vroom Model of Shared Decision Making

The Vroom model matches participation in decision making with the nature of the problem and situation. Four rules to enhance the quality of decisions.

a) Quality Rule. Use a unilateral approach to decision making only if;- The quality requirement is low and the matter unimportant to

subordinates, or- The quality requirement is low, the decision is important, and will be

readily accepted by subordinates.b) Leader Information Rule. Don’t make a unilateral decision if;

- The quality of decision is important and you don’t possess sufficient information and expertise to solve the problem alone.

c) Trust Rule. Make a unilateral decision when;- The quality of the decision is important and you can’t trust subordinates to

decide on the basis of the organizational goals.d) Problem Structure Rule. Involve knowledgeable subordinates to collect relevant

information when;- The quality of the decision is important, the problem is unstructured, and

you lack sufficient information or expertise.

9.1.2 The Hoy-Tarter Model: A simplified model of shared decision making

Subordinates accept some decisions without question because they are indifferent to them. As Barnard (1938) explains, there is a zone of indifference where each individual within which orders are accepted without conscious questioning of their authority. Simon prefers the more positive term, zone of acceptance, where subordinates is critical in deciding under what conditions to involve or not involve subordinates in decision making.

Version: 01Date: 18/03/2011

2


9.1.3 Assumptions of the Hoy-Tarter Model

• As subordinates are involved in decision making located within their ZONE OF ACCEPTANCE, participation will be less effective.

• As subordinates are involved in decision making outside their ZONE OF ACCEPTANCE, participation will be more effective.

• As participants are involved in decision making for which they have MARGINAL EXPERTISE, their participation will be marginally effective.

• As subordinates are involved in decision making for which they have MARGINAL INTEREST, their participation will be marginally effective.

9.1.4 Decision-Making Structures and functions

Hoy and Tarter (2003) suggest five decision-making structures; Group consensus: The administrator involves participants in the decision

making, and then the group decides. All group member shares equally as they generate and evaluate a decision, but total consensus is required before a decision can be made.

Group majority. The administrator involves participants in the decision making, and then the group decides by majority rule.

Group advisory. The administrator solicits the opinions of the entire group, discusses the implications of group suggestions, and them make a decision that may or may not reflect subordinates’ desires.

Individual advisory. The administrator consults with subordinates individually who have expertise to inform the decision, and them makes a decision that may or may not reflect their opinions.

Unilateral decision. The administrator makes the decision without consulting or involving subordinates in the decision.

9.1.5 Leaders Roles for Decision Making

There are five leadership roles: Integrator – brings subordinates together for consensus decision making.

The task is to reconcile divergent opinions and positions. Parliamentarian – open communication by protecting the opinions of the

minority and leads participants through a democratic process to a group decision.

Educators – reduces resistance to change by explaining and discussing with group members the opportunities and constraints of the decisional issues.

Solicitor – seeks advice from subordinate-experts. The quality of decisions is improved as the administrator guides the generation of relevant information.

Director – makes unilateral decision in those instances where the subordinates have no expertise or personal stake. The goal is efficiency.

9.2 Developing Teachers for Decision Making

Not all teachers want to be involved in decisions; in fact, some teachers are quite comfortable leaving all the major decisions to the administrators or principals. A healthy perspective is


3


one in which teachers want to be involved in decision when they can make a contribution. There is a lot of talent on most teachers, and a challenge for all administrators is to find ways to release that talent. To be effective in the empowerment of teachers, principals have an education role as well as a sharing role. First, teachers have to learn and then show that the well-being of their students and school take precedence over personal agendas. Principals must also demonstrate authenticity with teachers – straight talk, openness, consistency, and no game playing.

Here are a few guidelines for preparing teachers for shared decision making:

Develop a culture that focuses on the goals of the school: student come first, Be authentic with teachers; tell it like it is, Develop a culture of trust; principals and teachers need to trust each other, If teacher expertise is lacking, develop knowledge in those areas, Don’t burden teachers with unimportant decisions, Don’t give decision authority you don’t have, Don’t engage teachers in share decision making until they are ready; they need to

break old traditions and learn new ways of deciding, so an incremental approach works, and

Ultimately, to be successful, teachers must have useful knowledge, be motivated to participate, and be willing to subordinate their personal agendas for the goo of the schools.

9.3 Summary

Clearly there are times when empowerment of teachers is appropriate, but at other times, it is not. There are situations when teacher participation improves the quality of the decision as well as times when it impedes effectiveness of the decisions. The critical question is, under what conditions should subordinates be involved in decision making, when and how should teachers be empowered?

9.4 Tutorial Activities

9.4.1 Activity 1Assess the extent to which your school is generally ready for empowerment. How much teacher conflict exists? How much principal-teacher conflict exists? In what decisions should the principal not be involved? How openly does the principal communicate information to staff? How open and supportive is the principal? In short, what are the greatest obstacles to shared decision making in your school?

9.5 REFERENCES

Wayne K. H, & Cecil G. M. (2008). Educational Administration: Theory, Research, and Practice. Eight Edition -International Edition. New York: McGraw – Hill Companies.


4

chapter 9

Business