A study comparing perceptions of department heads and significant others in higher education in relation to role and duty, job effectiveness, and job satisfaction

The purpose of this study was two-fold: (1) to investigate how academic department heads in higher education perceived themselves in relation to duties and roles in comparison to how significant others (deans and faculty members perceived them; and (2) to investigate how these perceptions or variations in perceptions affected (a) their job satisfaction and (b) their job effectiveness. The three research questions guiding the study were as follows: (1) What are the department heads' perceptions of their roles and duties within the organization as compared to their associates' perceptions? (2) What are the deans' and faculty members' perceptions of the department head's job effectiveness? (3) What are the department heads' perceptions of their levels of job satisfaction? Research questions were based on the review of literature, especially on the Getzels-Guba social systems theory. The study involved three institutions of higher education in the Southeast. Data were collected by means of personal interviews utilizing a researcher-made interview guide. Forty-four participants in three public institutions of higher education were interviewed: eight deans, nine department heads, and twenty-seven faculty members. The results were then codified and qualitatively treated. Major conclusions reached were as follows. (1) Deans and department heads perceived the headship position as a leadership position while faculty perceived it as administrative/managerial. (2) Contrary to what much of the literature implied, it was not the lack of role definition that caused discomfort for the department heads, but the very nature of the role (dichotomous, half-faculty/half-administration) itself. (3) Variations in role perception did not appear to diminish the job satisfaction levels of the department heads. (4) Variations in role perception did not seem to affect the perception of the department head's effectiveness in an adverse manner.