الگوی مفهومی توسعه وتکامل دانشگاه سازمانی
الموضوعات :
اکرم طالبی
1
(دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی)
سعید غیاثی ندوشن
2
(دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی)
عباس عباس پور
3
(دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی)
علی خورسندی طاسکوه
4
(دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی)
الکلمات المفتاحية: دانشگاه عمومی دانشگاه سازمانی گرندد تئوری توسعه و تکامل,
ملخص المقالة :
دانشگاه سازمانی حلقه اتصال سازمان و دانش تخصصی بوده و یکی از کارآمدترین سازوکارها برای ورود به صحنه رقابت در عرصه ی جهانی است. با توجه به ابلاغیه تعطیلی یا ادغام برخی از دانشگاه های فوق در دانشگاه های عمومی و مسائل متعدد دیگری که این دانشگاه ها درگیر هستند، هدف پژوهش حاضر استخراج عوامل موثر بر تکامل و توسعه آنها در ایران است. بدین منظور با استفاده از روش گرندد تئوری و مصاحبه با 12 نفر از خبرگان حوزه دانشگاه سازمانی و مدیران دانشگاه های فوق، داده های اولیه جمع آوری و طی مراحل کد گذاری، مقوله ها استخراج شدند. نتایج یافته ها نشان می دهد که موارد متعددی از درون سازمان و دانشگاه بر عمکرد دانشگاه موثر هستند. از جمله مهمترین آنها شفاف سازی هدف دانشگاه، مدیران ارشد سازمان و دانشگاه، منابع مالی، میزان مشارکت، فراگیران، انعطاف پذیری ساختار، برنامه های آموزشی و مدیریت دانش. دو مولفه استقلال دانشگاه و خصوصی سازی نیز از بیرون دانشگاه بر آن موثر هستند. پیشنهاد می شود با شفاف سازی هدف از یک سو و اجرای صحیح اصل 44 قانون اساسی از سوی دیگر امکان فعالیت موثر و اقتصادی برای بخش خصوصی فراهم شود، در این صورت دانشگاه سازمانی زمینه رشد و توسعه افراد و سازمان را فراهم خواهد کرد.
1.Rademakers M. Corporate universities: driving of the learning organization. 2014: Milton Park: Routledge, AbingdonOxon OX14 4RN
2.Ewer .G. Case Study: Description of a Corporate University’s Operational Factors. (Dissertation). Oregon State University. 2015
3.Deiser R. Developing Leaders, Executive Education in Practice. 2012: 17-1. www.iedp.com
4.Dealtry R. The Corporate University Blueprint. DSA Publications Hunstanton Harborne Birmingham. 2013: B17 8SX United Kingdom. Web: www.g-acua.org
5.Meister J.C. Corporate Universities: Lessons in Building a World-class Work Force, rev. ed. (1998). McGraw-Hill, New York, NY
6.Rademakers M. Corporate universities: driving force of knowledge innovation, Journal of Workplace Learning. 2005: (17) 1/2. 130-136. doi.org/10.1108/ 13665620510574513
7.Ayuningtias H, Anggadwita G, Nurbaiti A & Kriseka P.M. The Corporate University Landscape in Indonesia. 2015: 3rd International Seminar and Conference on Learning Organization
8.Dealtry R. The Future Of Corporate Universities; How Your Company Can Benefit from Value and Performance-Driven Organisational Development, 2017: Published: Emerald, First edition
9.Meister J. Corporate universities: Market – driven education. Journal of Business Disciplines, Indiana University Southwest. 2000: 151X / (1), 54-63
10. Rhéaume L & Gardoni M. The challenges facing corporate universities in dealing with open innovation, Journal of Workplace Learning. 2015: (27 ) 4. 315-328, doi.org/10.1108/JWL-03-2014-0023
11. Grenzer J. Developing and implementing a corporate university. 2006: Amherst MA: HRD Press
12.Deiser R. Corporate universities – Modeerscheinung oder strategischer Erfolgsfaktor?, Organisation sentwicklung. 1998: (17)1.36-49
13.Rademakers M.F.L. Hoe strategisch is uw corporate university? Drie generieke niveaus Van corporate university ontwikkeling, Opleiding & Ontwikkeling. 2001:(14) 4. 15-20
14.Paton R. Peters G. Storey J & Taylor S. Handbook of corporate university development: Managing strategic learning initiative in public and private domains. 2005: Aldershot, UK: Gower
15.Taylor S & Paton R. Corporate Universities: Historical Development, Conceptual Analysis & Relations with Public-sector Higher Education. 2002: Retrieved from www.obhe.ac.uk
16.Arnone M. Corporate universities: a viewpoint on the challenges and best practices, Career Development International. 1998: (3) 5.199-205, https://doi.org/10.1108/13620439810229415
17.Allen M. The Corporate University Handbook: Designing, Managing, and Growing a Successful Program. 2002: AMACOM. Retrieved from www.amazon.com
18.Global Learning Resources. Frequently Asked Questions. 2005: http://www.glresources.com
19.Pillay K & Wijnbeek D. The Corporate University’ Training and learning Solution for a South African Airline Industry, Journal of Human Resource Management. 2006: (4) 2. 29-38
20.Dealtry R. Achieving integrated performance management with the corporate university, Journal of Workplace Learning. 2005: (17) 1/2. 65-78, doi.org/10.1108/13665620510574469
21.Taghavi R. Mosadegh Khah M. Ahangar M & Ahmadvand A. Developing a Conceptual Model for Performance Measurement of Organizational Universities through Developed Scorecard Compound Approach. Journal of Research in Human Resources Management.1396: 1(27): 1-20
22.Rajab Beagi M & Hamidi L . Corporate Uneversity. Journal of Management and Accounting Research. 1393: 9
23.Mohamed O & Morsi M. Improving The Performance Of Industrial-Technical Schools In Egypt In The Light Of Corporate Schools Model: A Qualitative Study, European Scientific Journal August 2016 edition. 2016:(12)22 ISSN: 1857 – 7881. URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n22p266
24.Konovalenko S V & Grunhaug K. Coordinating Flows of Organisational Knowledge: The Role of the Corporate University, Russian Management Journa. 2017: l 15(1), 68-51. С.51–68. doi: 10.21638/11701/spbu18.2017.103
25.Sá Freire P de. Dandolini G A & de Souza J A. Implementation Process of Corporate University in Network (CUN).International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, 2017 ISSN:2411-2933. From http://ijier.net/ijier/article/view/873
26.Scarso E. Corporate universities as knowledge management tools, VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems. 2017: (47) 4.538-554. doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-12-2016-0074
27.Stefano P A. Pellizzoni E & Buganza T. The design process of corporate universities: a stakeholder approach, Journal of Workplace Learning. 2017: (29) 4.304-318, https://doi.org/10.1108/JWL-04-2016-0024
28.Parshakov P & Shakina E A. With or without CU: A comparative study of efficiency of European and Russian corporate universities, Journal of Intellectual Capital. 2018: ( 19 ) 1.96-111, doi.org/10.1108/JIC-01-2017-0011
29.Tong X. Perceptions of the value of training , extent of involvement in corporate university programs, level of organizational commitment, and the accountability of a corporate university programas viwed by managers in china.(dissertation)Human Resource Education. 2018: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
30.Chin, T., Yang, Y., Zhang, P., Yu, X., & Cao, L. (2019). Co-creation of Social Innovation: Corporate Universities as Innovative Strategies for Chinese Firms to Engage with Society. Sustainability, 11, 1438
31.Taylor S. Corporate universities and redefinition of a medieval brand. International Higher Education. 2003: Available from www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/newsletter/news30/test002
32. News Channel. Uncertain status of alumni of the University of Petroleum. 1397. (Cited 1396). Available from: www.irinn.ir/fa/news/527994
33. Sharifzadeh M.Sh, Hoseani M & Ahmadi Gorji H. Backgrounds, Needs, and Policies of Transforming the Agricultural Higher Education System Along the Iranian Islamic Model of Progress, 5th Islamic Model of Progress Conference.1395
34. Higher Education Center For Cultural Heritage.( Cited 1397). 1397: Available from www.miras.ac.ir
35.Strauss A. L & Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. 1990: Sage
36.Strauss A L & Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 1998: 2nd Ed. Sage
37.Craswell J.W. Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. 2007: Translate. H Danaee fard. Tehran. Safar. 1394
38.Regulation on the Establishment of Higher Education Institutions Affiliated with Governmental Organizations. 1364. Available from https://rc.majlis.ir.1398
