Reinforcing pillars for quality culture development: a path analytic model

Figures & data

Figure 1. Hypothesised path relationships between quality culture variables.

Note: the line connecting the ‘leadership’ and ‘organisational values’ variables reflects that a relation between these variables is expected, but that the direction of causality is unknown.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics, correlations and Alpha Reliability Estimates (on the diagonal) of quality culture variables.

	M^◊	SD	N	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1. Human Relations	2.87	.62	86	(.79)
2. Internal Process	3.16	.54	86	.17	(.73)
3. Rational Goal	3.18	.52	86	.09	.41**	(.72)
4. Open Systems	2.90	.56	86	.63**	.04	.21*	(.74)
5. Leadership	3.19	.60	87	.56 **	.32 **	.02	.38 **	(.83)
6. Communication	3.05	.73	89	.59 **	.26 *	.05	.43 **	.65 **	(.84)
7. Empowerment	3.99	.65	89	.24 *	−.2	−.07	.18	−.05	.06	(.87)
8. Commitment	3.66	.65	87	.51 **	.19	−.05	.25 *	.34 **	.44 **	.22 *	(.87)
9. Ownership	4.14	.45	89	.01	.05	.03	.03	.06	.07	.32 **	.22 *	(.76)
10. Quality enhancement	3.85	.51	89	.15	.06	.26 *	.16	−.07	.12	.23 *	.19	.39 **	(.76)

Notes: M: Mean; SD: Standard Deviation; N: Number of observations. ^◊Scale 1–5, 1: strongly disagree, 5: strongly agree. *Correlation is significant at the <.05 level (2-tailed), **Correlation is significant at the <.01 level (2-tailed); correlations between variables hypothesised to causally relate are presented in bold.

Figure 2. Path model standardised coefficients of the relations between quality culture variables; *p < .05; **p < .01, *** p < .001.

Note: the relationships between variables depicted in Figure 2 resemble the hypothesised relationships as presented in Figure 1 which were found to be statistically significant; the line connecting the ‘leadership’ and ‘organisational values’ variables reflects that a relation between these variables is expected, but that the direction of causality is unknown.

Table

Statements	N	Mean	Min	Max	SD
Human Relations Model
1. The study programme has a very personal character. It is like an extended family. People seem to share a lot of themselves.	86	2.67	1	5	0.94
2. The leadership in the study programme is generally considered to exemplify mentoring, facilitating or nurturing	86	2.76	1	4	0.91
3. The management style in the study programme is characterised by teamwork, consensus and participation.	86	3.01	1	5	0.91
4. The glue that holds the study programme together is loyalty and mutual trust. Commitment to the study programme runs high.	86	3.40	2	5	0.84
5. The study programme emphasizes human development. High trust, openness and participation persist.	86	2.93	1	4	0.88
6. The success of the study programme is defined on the basis of the development of human resources, teamwork, commitment, and concern for staff	86	2.47	1	5	0.82
Open Systems Model
1. The study programme is very dynamic and entrepreneurial. People are willing to stick their necks out and take risks.	86	2.71	1	5	0.87
2. The leadership in the study programme is generally considered to exemplify entrepreneurship, innovation or risk taking.	86	2.81	1	5	0.89
3. The management style in the study programme is characterised by innovation, freedom and uniqueness.	86	2.93	1	5	0.82
4. The glue that holds the study programme together is commitment to innovation and development. There is an emphasis on being on the cutting edge.	86	2.99	1	4	0.74
5. The study programme emphasizes acquiring new resources and creating new challenges. Trying new things and prospecting for opportunities are valued.	86	2.97	1	4	0.80
6. The success of the study programme is defined on the basis of having the most unique or newest teaching methods. The programme is leading in innovation of education.	86	2.97	1	4	0.90
Rational Goal Model
1. The study programme is very result-oriented. A major concern is to get the teaching job done. Teachers are achievement oriented (value high evaluation scores).	86	3.56	1	5	0.76
2. The leadership in the study programme is generally considered to exemplify a no-nonsense, result-oriented focus.	86	3.10	1	5	0.84
3. The management style in the study programme is characterised by competitiveness with other programmes, high demands and achievement.	86	3.12	1	5	0.89
4. The glue that holds the study programme together is the emphasis on achievement and goal accomplishment.	86	3.41	1	5	0.71
5. The study programme emphasizes competitive actions and achievement.	86	2.98	1	5	0.78
6. The success of the study programme is defined on the basis of outpacing the competition. Competitive educational leadership is key.	86	2.91	1	5	0.85
Internal Process Model
1. The study programme is very controlled and structured. Formal processes generally govern what people do.	86	3.00	1	5	0.84
2. The leadership in the study programme is generally considered to exemplify coordinating, organising, or smooth-running efficiency.	86	2.73	1	5	0.85
3. The management style in the study programme is characterised by conformity, predictability, and stability in relationships.	86	3.26	1	5	0.74
4. The glue that holds the study programme together is formal rules and policies. Maintaining a smooth-running organisation is important.	86	3.33	1	5	0.73
5. The study programme emphasizes permanence and stability. Efficiency, control and smooth operations are important	86	3.24	1	5	.853
6. The success of the study programme is defined on the basis of efficiency. Smooth scheduling and efficient organisation of education are critical	86	3.37	1	5	.921
Leadership: charismatic/transactional
1. Can be believed and relied upon to keep its word.	87	3.40	1	5	0.77
2. Can be relied upon to meet its obligations.	87	3.49	2	5	0.65
3. Keeps control and takes charge when problems arise.	87	3.07	1	5	0.86
4. Has a vision and imagination on the future of the study programme.	87	3.16	1	5	0.93
5. Is able to get the study programme’s staff enthusiastic about its ideas.	87	2.76	1	5	0.86
6. Highly values clear agreements.	87	2.62	1	5	0.96
Communication: vertical/strategic
1. I was adequately informed about changes within the study programme	89	3.13	1	5	1.04
2. The study programme management regularly took the initiative to discuss educational issues with me.	89	2.85	1	5	1.12
3. I received sufficient feedback from the study programme management about the work I did as a (vice) coordinator	89	2.87	1	5	0.91
4. I received sufficient information on the study programme’s policies and goals.	89	3.12	1	5	0.92
5. The communication within the study programme motivated and stimulated an enthusiasm for meeting the study programme’s goals.	89	2.83	1	5	0.97
6. I received adequate information, which was needed to do my job as a (vice) coordinator	89	3.47	1	5	0.88
Empowerment
1. As a (vice) coordinator, I could decide on my own in how to go about doing my work.	89	3.78	1	5	0.93
2. As a (vice) coordinator, I had considerable opportunity for independence and freedom in how I did my job.	89	3.82	1	5	0.85
3. As a (vice) coordinator, I had significant autonomy in determining how I did my job.	89	4.03	1	5	0.75
4. My impact as a (vice) coordinator on what happened in the course/cluster was large.	89	4.04	1	5	0.81
5. As a (vice) coordinator, I could influence what happened in the course/cluster.	89	4.33	1	5	0.78
6. As a (vice) coordinator, I had a great deal of control over what happened in the course/cluster.	89	3.93	1	5	0.88
Commitment
1. I would be very happy to keep on being active in this study programme for the rest of my career.	87	3.66	1	5	0.93
2. I really feel as if the study programme’s problems are my own.	87	3.39	1	5	0.93
3. I feel a strong sense of belonging to this study programme.	87	3.82	1	5	0.87
4. I feel emotionally attached to this study programme.	87	3.77	2	5	0.82
5. I feel like part of the family in this study programme.	87	3.14	1	5	1.03
6. This study programme has a great deal of personal meaning for me.	87	3.75	2	5	0.70
7. I am willing to put in a great deal of effort beyond that normally expected in order to make the study programme successful.	87	4.10	1	5	0.76
Ownership^a
1. I set high quality goals for the course/cluster I held a (shared) responsibility for.	89	4.31	3	5	0.56
2. I felt my course/cluster made a positive contribution to the quality of the study programme.	89	4.22	3	5	0.62
3. I did not hesitate to tell colleagues in the course/cluster if I saw something that was done wrong.	89	3.93	2	5	0.69
Quality enhancement practices
1. There was sufficient communication with students about evaluation results and potential improvements.	89	3.70	1	5	0.87
2. There was sufficient communication with teachers about evaluation results and potential improvements	89	3.67	2	5	0.82
3. Educational quality management (quality monitoring and improvement) was considered an important task of course/cluster planning group members.	89	3.92	2	5	0.79
4. Student evaluations were used to take concrete measures for improvement before the next running phase of the course/cluster.	89	4.13	1	5	0.76
5. Ad-hoc measures for resolving issues with regard to the organisation of education were taken whenever needed	89	4.19	1	5	0.71
6. Specific attention was spent to safeguard an optimal organisation of education.	89	4.01	1	5	0.87
7. The feedback of teachers (tutors, trainers) was used to further develop the education.	89	4.07	2	5	0.72
8. The results of evaluations were systematically compared with predetermined educational quality criteria or standards	89	3.07	1	5	1.09

^aThree sample items are presented for this scale (total subscale included in the survey consisted of five items). Copyright 2007 Psychological Ownership Questionnaire (POQ) by James B. Avey & Bruce J. Avolio. All rights reserved in all medium. Published by Mind Garden, Inc. www.mindgarden.com. This instrument was modified – by G.Bendermacher – from the original.

Table

			B	SE	Β	p
Communication	<---	Leadership	.534	.120	.435	***
Communication	<---	Human_Relations	.326	.131	.275	.013
Communication	<---	Open_Systems	.118	.136	.089	.386
Communication	<---	Rational_Goal	−.047	.125	−.033	.707
Communication	<---	Internal_Process	.109	.125	.080	.385
Empowerment	<---	Communication	.008	.126	.009	.951
Empowerment	<---	Leadership	−.290	.152	−.267	.057
Empowerment	<---	Human_Relations	.396	.139	.376	.004
Ownership	<---	Empowerment	.226	.069	.328	.001
Ownership	<---	Leadership	.054	.076	.072	.477
Commitment	<---	Ownership	.271	.135	.184	.045
Commitment	<---	Communication	.200	.109	.222	.067
Commitment	<---	Leadership	−.023	.134	−.021	.865
Commitment	<---	Empowerment	.070	.097	.069	.473
Commitment	<---	Human_Relations	.494	.142	.464	***
Commitment	<---	Open_Systems	−.181	.133	−.153	.171
Enhancement	<---	Commitment	.107	.077	.137	.163
Enhancement	<---	Rational_Goal	.289	.101	.293	.004
Enhancement	<---	Internal_Process	−.080	.099	−.084	.420
Enhancement	<---	Ownership	.367	.115	.319	.001
Enhancement	<---	Empowerment	.074	.079	.093	.349

Notes: B: unstandardised path coefficients; SE: standard error; β: standardised path coefficients; p: probability/strength of evidence to reject the null hypothesis. ***p < .001.