ماهیت و فرایندهای مرتبط با ادراک از جایگاه اجتماعی در اعضای هیات علمی

نویسندگان
دانشگاه خوارزمی
چکیده
هدف این پژوهش بررسی ماهیت، وضعیت و فرایندهای مرتبط با ادارک از جایگاه اجتماعی در بین اعضای هیات علمی یکی از دانشگاه های دولتی شهر تهران بود. با استفاده از یک طرح پژوهش کیفی با 20 نفر از اعضای هیات علمی مصاحبه های نیمه ساختار یافته برای پاسخ گویی به سوالات پژوهش تنظیم شد. داده ها با استفاده از روش تحلیل مضمونی اکتشافی تحلیل شدند. تحلیل داده ها ماهیت جایگاه اجتماعی را نوعی کاستی و فاصله بین وضعیت موجود و وضعیت ایده‌آل حیات اجتماعی و حرفه‌ای در دانشگاه و جامعه نشان داد. ارزیابی اغلب شرکت کنندگان درباره وضعیت جایگاه اجتماعی، مبین تنزل جایگاه اجتماعی شغل دانشگاهی در سلسله مراتب اجتماعی بود. تحلیل داده‌ها چهار مقوله اصلی سازمانی، نهادی، مدیریتی، سیاسی و شخصیتی را به عنوان مقوله های اصلی و نیاز به بازسازی جایگاه اجتماعی را به عنوان مضمون اصلی مرتبط کننده این مقوله ها شناسایی کرد. براساس یافته ها، به نظر می‌رسد جایگاه اجتماعی فرایندی است که در دانشگاه ساخته می‌شود و متاثر از یک سری عوامل ساختاری و تا حدی ویژگی‌های شخصیتی و منشی قرار دارد. جایگاه اجتماعی حرفه‌های دانشگاهی تنزل یافته است ولی دانشگاه میتواند با اصلاح فرایندهای سازمانی، نهادی، مدیریتی، سیاسی در بازسازی جایگاه اجتماعی عضو هیات علمی نقش‌آفرینی کند. همچنین ملاک قرار دادن شاخص‌های مرتبط با جایگاه اجتماعی میتواند در برگزینش افراد برای تصدی حرفه های دانشگاهی کمک کننده باشد.


کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله English

The nature and process related to perceived social status among faculty members

چکیده English

The aim of this study was to explore the nature and process related to perceived social status among faculty members in Iran. By using a qualitative research design, 20 faculty members interviewed. Data were analyzed by exploratory thematic analysis. Analyzing the data showed that faculty member’s perceived social status something like a gap or distance between existing and ideal status in their professional and social life in university and society. Judgement of faculty members about social status suggest that social status for academic jobs degraded in social hierarchies. Furthermore, finding revealed four categories including organizational, institutional, managerial, political and personal process as the main categories. It seemed the need for reconstructing social status would be the linking process between categories and it is convincing to consider that as the main theme in data. According to findings, it seems perceived social status is constructed in university and it is influenced by a number of structural and personality process. Social status has degraded for academic jobs but universities could reconstruct social status by modifying organizational, institutional, managerial and political process. In addition, applying indices related to social status could be effective for selecting volunteers for academic jobs.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Social status
faculty member
Perceived organizational support
Management
perceived organizational politic
1. Al-e-Ahmad, J. (1996). On the Service and Treachery of Intellectuals. Tehran: Sepehr library. [in Persian].
2. Anderson, C., & Cowan, J. (2014). Personality and Status Attainment: A Micropolitics Perspective. In The Psychology of Social Status (pp. 99-117). Springer New York.
3. Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of management review, 14(1), 20-39.
4. Atta, M., & Khan, M. J. (2016). Perceived organizational politics, organizational citizenship behavior and job attitudes among university teachers. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 26(2).1-15
5. Attride-Stirling, J. (2001). Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative research, 1(3), 385-405.
6. Bailey, T., Berg, P., & Sandy, C. (2001). The effect of high-performance work practices on employee earnings in the steel, apparel, and medical electronics and imaging industries. ILR Review, 54(2A), 525-543.
7. Baron, R., Branscombe, N. (2015). Social Psychology. (Translated by Yousef Karimi, 2010). Tehran: Ravan Press. [in Persian]
8. Butler, D. (2009). Plagiarism scandal grows in Iran; investigation finds more cases of duplication in publications co-authored by ministers and senior officials. Nature, 462(4274), 704-706.
9. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Homo academicus. Translated by Alireza Kaviani, 2018. Tehran: Institue for Social and Cultural Studies. [in Persian].
10. Caffarella, R. S., & Zinn, L. F. (1999). Professional development for faculty: A conceptual framework of barriers and supports. Innovative Higher Education, 23(4), 241-254.
11. Chalabi, M. (1997). Personality Structure among Iranian. Tehran: Nashre-e-Ney. [in Persian]
12. Cheng, J.T., Tracy, J.L., Anderson, C. (2011). The psychology of social status. Springer: New York.
13. Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., & Henrich, J. (2010). Pride, personality, and the evolutionary foundations of human social status. Evolution and Human Behavior, 31(5), 334-347.
14. De Botton, A. (2008). Status anxiety. London: Hamish Hamilton, Penguin Books
15. Dehghani, M. (2017). Analysis of Tarikh-i Bayhaqi based on the literary, social and psychological point of views. Tehran: Nashre-e-Ney. [in Persian]
16. Drory, A. (1993). Perceived political climate and job attitudes. Organization Studies, 14(1), 59-71.
17. Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: a meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological bulletin, 129(4), 569-591.
18. Fakouhi, N. (2015). University! Some reflection about universities, academician and students. Tehran: Institue for Social and Cultural Studies. [in Persian].
19. Fuller, J. B., Hester, K., Barnett, T., Frey, L., Relyea, C., & Beu, D. (2006). Perceived external prestige and internal respect: New insights into the organizational identification process. Human relations, 59(6), 815-846.
20. Goffman, E. (1951). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. (Translated by Masoud Kianpour, 2012). Tehran: Nashr-e-Markaz. [in Persian]
21. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity. (Translated by Naser Tofighyan, 2012). Tehran: Nashr-e-Ney. [in Persian]
22. Gilbert, P. (2002). A new conceptualization of depression based on dominance and shame. New york: Willy press.
23. Ghanee-Rad, M, A., Khavar, K.H. (2009). Sociology of academic actors in Iran. Tehran: Elm Publication. [in Persian].
24. Ghanee-Rad, M, A. (2005). Interactions and communications in scientific society. Tehran: Institute for Social and Cultural Studies. [in Persian].
25. Guest, G., Bunce, A. & Johnson, L (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82.
26. Hejazi, Y., Rostami, F. (2010). A Study of the Factors Affecting the University of Tehran Agricultural Colleges’ Faculty Members’ Professional Development. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research, 2-41(3), 347-358 [In Persian].
27. Higgins, E. T., Klein, R., & Strauman, T. (1985). Self-concept discrepancy theory: A psychological model for distinguishing among different aspects of depression and anxiety. Social cognition, 3(1), 51-76.
28. Inglehart, R. (2003). Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change around the World, Cambridge University Press.
29. Jenkins, R. (2000). Social identity. (Translated by Touraj Yarahmadi, 2013). Tehran: Pardis-e-Danesh Publication. [in Persian]
30. Kacmar, K. M., & Ferris, G. R. (1991). Perceptions of organizational politics scale (POPS): Development and construct validation. Educational and Psychological measurement, 51(1), 193-205.
31. Masthead, A. S. (2018). The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 57(2), 267-291.
32. Mouzelis, N. (2008). Modern and postmodern social theorizing: Bridging the divide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
33. Maslow, A. (1948). "Some theoretical consequences of basic need gratification." Journal of personality 16(4): 402-416.
34. Morrison, E., Rudd, E., Picciano, J., & Nerad, M. (2011). Are you satisfied? PhD education and faculty taste for prestige: Limits of the prestige value system. Research in Higher Education, 52(1), 24-46
35. Olland, B. A. (2016). Factors and strategies that influence faculty involvement in public service. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 20(1), 63-72.
36. Reeve, M. J. (1990). Understanding Motivation and Emotion. (Translated by Yahyaee Seyedmohammadi, 1392). Tehran: Nashr-e-Virayesh. [in Persian]
37. Tajfel, H. (1982). Social psychology of intergroup relations. Annual review of psychology, 33(1), 1-39.
38. Thompson, M. N., & Dahling, J. J. (2012). Perceived social status and learning experiences in social cognitive career theory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2), 351-361.
39. Turner, J.H. (2010). Theoretical principles of sociology: Volume 2 Micro dynamics. New York: Springer.
40. Valle, M., & Witt, L. A. (2001). The moderating effect of teamwork perceptions on the organizational politics-job satisfaction relationship. The Journal of Social Psychology, 141(3), 379-388
41. Vilkin, L. (2011). Workplace Bullying in Academe: A Grounded Theory Study Exploring How Faculty Cope With the Experience of being bullied. Phd dissertation. Nova Southeastern University.
42. Wood, S., & De Menezes, L. (1998). High commitment management in the UK: Evidence from the workplace industrial relations survey, and employers' man power and skills practices survey. Human Relations, 51(4), 485-515.
43. Willig, C. (2011). An introduction to qualitative research in Psychology. (Translated by Hamid Khanipour and et.al. 2017). Tehran: Kharazmi University Press. [in Persian]