The application of March and Simon's organizational conflict theory to the voluntary interinstitutional consortium

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
The application of March and Simon's organizational conflict theory to the voluntary interinstitutional consortium
Physical Description:
xii, 136 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Brennon, Willie D., 1940-
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Interorganizational relations   ( lcsh )
University cooperation   ( lcsh )
Social conflict   ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis--University of Florida.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 127-134).
Statement of Responsibility:
by Willie D. Brennon.
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 000091153
notis - AAK6548
oclc - 05859371
System ID:
AA00002198:00001

Full Text














THE APPLICATION OF MARCH
ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT THEORY
INTERINSTITUTIONAL CON


WILLIE


AND SIMON'S
TO THE VOLUNTARY
SORTIUM


BRENNON


IN P


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE
THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
ARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS F
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY


COUNCIL


OR


DEGREE






























To my wife,


Peggy,


our two daughters,


Tarryn and Mia,


dedicate


this


work.


Without


their


support and encouragement,


perseverance


and endurance,


thi s


endeavor


would have never


been completed.

















ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


The writer


acknowledges


indebtedness


those


individuals,


faculty


friends,


who contributed


to his


professional


growth


and development during his


graduate


studies.


Sincere


appreciation


is also merited by


those


individuals


without whom


this


dissertation would not have


become


a reality.


Among


these,


special


thanks


are accorded


those who


encouraged


writer


brother-in-law,


pursue


graduate


Rayfield M.


McGhee


studies,

, whose


including

persis-


tent encouragement


persuaded him


to attend


University


Florida.


Thanks


are


extended


to Dr.


Ralph


Kimbrough,


writer


s advisor


during


studies


toward


the master


degree


one


of several


persons who encouraged him


pursue doctoral


studies.


Sincere


appreciation


offered


to Dr


Michael


Nunnery


invaluable


assistance he


provided during


the embryonic


stage of


this work.


assistance


with


theory made


further


development


this


study


seem


plausible.


*I-, t~' t.l a ,-~ r t-% ,. r. 4


- -I. -


rr *-LI 4..4 4. .


4--'


t~ ,,,cFnlC


II Ik










that committee.


guidance


Their patience,


throughout


understanding,


this endeavor -will


support


forever


remembered.


William M.


until his


Pro found


Alexander,


retirement


appreciation


a member


from


also extended


doctoral


University


to Dr.


committee


of Florida.


Acknowledgement


Council


is accorded


Interinstitutional


those members of


Leadership who gave


untiringly


their


time


in assisting


the writer.


Special


thanks


The many


to Drs.


Lewis


suggestions


Patterson and Fritz


provided by


them greatly


Grupe.


enhanced


quality


this work.


Finally,


Nickens,


appreciation


Marcia J.


extended


Belcher


to Dr.


Donald F.


John M.


Chichester


technical


and editorial


assistance


they provided


various


points


during the development of


this


study.



















TABLE OF CONTENTS


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


LIST OF


TABLES


S~~ ~ ~ S S


LIST OF FIGURES


S S S S S S S S S S S S S S


ABSTRACT


CHAPTER


INTRODUCTION


5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 51


The Problem .
Background of
Statement of
Delimitations
Justification
Assumptions
Definitions of T


Organization of


. .
the
he
and
for


erms
the


. . .
Problem
Problem .
Limitations
the Study .


S S S S S S


Research


CONFLICT THEORY


AND RELATED LITERATURE


iflict The
March and
Indivi
Organi
confli
Organi
confli
Intero
Conflict
Resolu
within
Resolu
within
Conflict J
Consortii


ory


Sim
dual
zati
ct w
zati
ct w
rgan
Reso
tion
the
tion
the
Mana'
um .


,O0


n's Concept
conflict
nal conflict


.an
con
an
ona
n


: individual
lization
: intergroup
nization


conflict


of individual
organization
of intergroup
organization
gement .


S S


* conflict
conflict

conflict


S S S S S S S S


Report


Con
















The


Pa ge











Governance and Decision-making
Conflict Within the Consortium


As an Approach


DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
Overview and Study
The Sample .
Instrumentation
Data Collection
Data Analysis


RESULTS AND ANALYSIS


to Community Education


Design . .


OF DATA


Research Questions .
Introduction
Results and Findings
Summary .


DISCUSSION, CO
RECOMMENDATION
Discussion
Review o
Findings


Conclusions
Implications
Recommendation


INCLUSIONN
S .


IMPLICATIONS


AND


e Theory


* S S S S S S 5 4 5
~~~ ~ ~ S S S
* ~~ S S S S S S


ns


Future


Study


APPENDICES


CONSORTIA PARTICIPATING


IN THE


STUDY


LETTER MAILED TO CONSORTIUM DIRECTORS
REQUESTING INFORMATION .


LETTER,
AND DATA


GENERAL INFORMATION AND
COLLECTION INSTRUMENTS


INSTRUCTIONS,


FOLLOW-UP


REFERENCE


LETTERS


NOTE


REFERENCES


BIOGRAPHICAL


SKETCH


















LIST OF


TABLE S


Table


A Typology


Individual


Conflict


S. . 22


A Profile o
Theoretical


the Composite
Propositions


sponses


S S S SS S S 565


Resource

Scheduling


Goals


*


S S S S S S S S S S S S


Informational


Source


S S S S S S S SS 571


Information Channeling


S . 73


Distribution of
Consortia .


the Age


Represented


S) S S S


Distribution


the Consortia


the Membe


rship


S S S S S S S S S S 75


Distribution of


Provided by


Number of


Represented


Services


Consortia


Homogeneity/Heterogeneity
the Consortium Membership


Correlation Matrix


Distribution of
. . . .


Variables


Paae

















LIST OF FIGURES


Figure


The bargaining


area


.. . 18


Factors


affecting


individual


conflict


individual

Factors af


reaction


fecting


to conflict


individual


conflict


within organizations


S S S S S S 525


Factors affect
within an org

Communication


ting


intergroup conflict


anization


patterns


the decision-making


level


consortium


Page
















Abstract of


Dissertation Presented


the Graduate


Council


of the University of
Requirements for the


Florida


Degree of


in Partial


Doctor


Fulfillment


of Philosophy


OF MARCH AND


SIMON 'S


THE APPLICATION


ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT THEORY TO THE VOLUNTARY
INTERINSTITUTIONAL CONSORTIUM

By


WILLIE D

June


. BRENNON

1979


Chairman:


Phillip A.


Clark


Major


Department:


Educational


Administration


primary


purpose


this


study was


to describe


interorganizational


consortia by


conflict


studying


voluntary


perceptions of


interinstitutional


consortium direc-


tors


presidents


propositions


of March,


of consorting


developed by


Simon


institutions,


March and Simon


, H.


(see


Organizations.


using


122-128


New


York:


John


Wiley


Sons,


1958)


describing


organic national


con-


flict in


traditional


organizations.


secondary purpose


was


to determine


relationships


existed between


theory


other variables


associated


with


consortium.


Specifically,


following


conditions


were


addressed.


To what extent do


consortium directors


insti-










the greater


felt need


joint decision-making with


respect


that resource.


greater


inter-


dependence


timing


of activities,


the greater


felt


need


joint decision-making with


respect


to scheduling.


"The


less


subjective operationality


of organizational


goals,


the greater


the differentiation of


individual


goals


the organization.


"The greater


number


independent


information


sources,


the greater


the differen-


tiation of


perceptions within


the organization.


"The


greater


channeling


information-processing,


greater


the differentiation


of perceptions


within


organization.


What


relationship


between


extent


which


conflict

theory


was

and


perceived


to occur


four variables


associate


the area

ed with


predicted


the con-


sortium:


age,


size,


number


services


pro-


vided,


the degree of homogeneity/heterogeneity


the membership.


An opinionnaire


developed by


author was


used


survey


randomly


selected


voluntary


interinstitutional


consortia.


These consortia


comprised


a sample


population


cons

and


isting


presidents


administrators,


consortium directors


institutional members.


Percentage,


I .*1


^









their perceptions


variables.


following


conclusions,


therefore,


are


based


results


composite


analysis


these


groups.


extent


to which


institutional


members were


mutually


dependent


upon a


limited


consortium resource was


directly


proportional


the members'


desire


joint


decision-making regarding


Institutional members'


allocation


involvement


that resource.


in interdepen-


denies


requiring


timing


activities was directly


proportional


members'


desire


joint decision-


making


regarding


scheduling.


The extent


in ascertaining


to which


the membership was


consortium's


level


success-


achievement of


stated


goals


goals was


advocated


The


inversely proportional


the consortium by


informational


number


the differences


the members.


sources within


interinstitutional


consortium does


not


vary


directly with


the degree


to which


differences


exist


the membership's


perception of


the consortium.


valid


conclusion


could be drawn


from


findings


regarding


channeling of


information within


consortium.


size


consortium showed a


relationship


with the


resource


S. a


scheduling variables.


Evidence










significant relationship existed between:


age,


number


services


provided,


degree of


homogeneity/heterogeneity


consortium membership and


extent


to which


conflict


was


perceived


to occur within


areas


predicted by


theory.
















CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION


Conflict


a phenomenon which


permeates all


aspects


society.


It is


an integral


part


a fact of


life which


of a democratic


unavoidable,


society


(Schofield,


1975,


According


to Lipset


(1960),


"the


existence of


a moderate state of


conflict is


fact


another way


defining


a legitimate democracy"


83).


A review of


literature


revealed


that


there


is a


general

theory


1963,


phenomenon of

that delineates


This


conflict

a basis


evidence


and,

for


provides


therefore1

direction


a basis


a general


(Boulding,


denoting


"why";


behavior;


it provides


serves


foundation


a guide


consistency


to new knowledge and,


consequently


1966,


new behavior


More


(Saunders,


specifically,


Phillips


theory of


Johnson,


conflict has


been


derived


from


analysis of


personal,


group,


organizational


behavior


that


purports


to provide


universality


predictability of


conflict


situations


these


rc( Qgnnnt-, \70=> rrnmn flg -










theory.


this


end,


collaborative environment as


exemplified by


consortium will


serve


exemplary


model.


The c

autonomous


onsortium,


a formal


institutions,


association of

a nontraditional


two or more

organizational


structure,

to 1925, a


a history


ind a


in the


phenomenonal


United


States which


growth rate


which


dates


spanned


back

the


10-year period between 1965


and 197


Patterson,


1974,


However,


until


1970s,


few researchers


attempted


to observe


and document


the various


aspects


its organizational


characteristics.


This


apparent lack


of interest regarding


research


the consortium parallels


paucity


of interest concerning


need


study


characteristics


traditional


organization


that


permeated


the early


1950s.


Boulding


(1953)


, in his


treatise


entitled


"The Organizational


Revolution,


" quite


succinctly


expressed


that idea


following manner:


This
and


revolution has
s not something


particularly
us silently.


received


conscious.


lit


i which we
It has


tle study
are
crept upon


something which


accept as
thinking.
raises pr
equipped


a


"natural "


And


oblems


yet,
with


almost without


the whole movement


which


we are


to deal.


When


the economic


conditions


existing


1970s


arc


STC










postsecondary


institutions,


dominant organizational


consortium may


form in modern


society.


become


Indeed,


ironic


that only


limited knowledge


been accumulated


regarding


various


characteristics


exemplified by


this


organizational


form.


theory


appropriately


serves


a guide


new


knowledge,


as a means


to delineate a basis


direction,


a foundation


consistency


in behavior,


then,


organizational


characteristics


the consortium environ-


ment need

context.


to be

Such


thoroughly

analysis wo


analyzed


uld enable


within a


one


theoretical


to determine how


previously


autonomous


organizations


with


limited resources


can


effectively


collaborate and adequately


serve


needs


their members.


the applicability

consortium setting


standing

consortium:


It logically


traditional


should be


characteristics pe

m. It should also


follows


conflict


first step


retaining


that a


theory

toward


to conflict


a first step


toward


test


under-


the

develop-


ing the


potential


for predicting


and describing


future


events


regarding


these


characteristics.


this


end,


field


portion


analyzing


data


this


gathered


study


involves


from a


sample


collecting and

population consisting


consortium directors


presidents


institutional










Problem


Background


Problem


scholarly


tional

purport


literature


organization has


possess


reveal


descriptive,


on conflict in

ed theoretical


heuristic,


tradi-


concepts


that


predictive


qualities.


Propositions


that maintain consistency with


these qualities


and,


therefore,


describe


nature of


con-


flict


in organizations


have been


postulated by


March


Simon


(1958


follows:


greater


resource,


the mutual


the greater the


dependence on


felt need


a limited


joint


decision-making with


respect


that resource.


122)


greater


interdependence of


timing


activities,


the greater


felt need


joint


decision-making with


respect


to scheduling.


less


subjective


operationality of organi-


national


goals,


the greater


the differentiation


individual


goals


the organization.


(pp.


125-


126)


greater


number


of independent


information


sources, tn


,e greater


differentiation of










perceptions within


the organization.


128)


March


and Simon also


asserted


that


aforementioned


propositions


should maintain


validity when applied


interorganizational


setting


131) .


Hence,


it is


intent of


this


study


to determine


applicability


these


propositions


an interorganizational


setting,


consortium.


Statement of


Problem


purpose


national


this


conflict in


studying


study


voluntary


perceptions


to describe


interinstitutional


interorgani-


consortia

s and


of consortium director


presidents of


consorting


institutions,


using


propositions


developed by March and Simon


describing organizational


conflict


traditional


organizations.


More


specifically,


answers


following


questions


will


be sought:


To what extent do


consortium directors,


and


institutional


presidents


agree with


the state-


ment,


upon


greater


a limited


the membership's


consortium resource,


dependency


greater


the membership's


regarding


desire


allocation


joint decision-making


that resource?


What


the extent


to which


consortium










scheduling


times


for activities


to occur,


greater


making


What is


which


the desire


regarding


joint decision-


scheduling?


relationship between


the consortium goals


extent


are achieved


extent


to which


consortium goals of


institutional


members differ


, as


directors,


perceived by


institutional


consortium


presidents?


To what extent do


consortium directors,


institutional


presidents


agree with


state-


ment,


the greater


informational


number of


sources


within


independent


the consortium,


greater


the difference


the membership's


perception of


consortium?


To what extent do


consortium directors,


and


ins titutional


presidents


agree with


state-


ment,


greater


within


consortium,


channeling of


the greater


information


the dif-


ference


the membership's


perception of


consortium?


What


relationship


consortium and


perceived


extent


to be engendered


between


to which


age of


conflict


within areas


predicted


i 4 4


rr


I I


'I 11










perceived


to occur within areas


predicted by


theory?


What is


relationship


between


number


services


consortium provides


its members


extent


to which conflict is


perceived


to be


engendered


within areas


predicted by


theoretical


propositions


What effect does


homogeneity or


heterogeneity


consortium membership


have


upon


the extent


which


conflict


is perceived


to occur within areas


predicted by


Delimitations


theory?


and Limitations


This

ness of pr

tradition


study was


positions


confined


to investigating


on organizational


organization in


describing


conflict

conflict


the effective-


in the


consortium.


this


purpose,


consortia


included in


this


investigation were only


those


that:


were classified


formal


association,


consisted


two or more members,


were


tions.


composed


Referent


primarily


groups were


of postsecondary


limited


institu-


the directors of


consortia


presidents of


institutional members.


Confinement was


also exemplified by


inclusion of


only


existing


consortia


that were


organized


the continental










A major


limitation of


this


study was


that


is an


post

the


fact design.

restrictions a


It was,


Attributed


therefore,


this


subjected


type


all of


of research.


Consistent with


latter,


this


researcher


recognizes


that


there may


have


been


limitations with


respect


data-gathering


process.


example


maturation as


described by


Campbell


Stanley


(1967,


may


have


been


inhibiting


the extent


that respondents


not have


re-


called


significant


past events.


Furthermore,


as a result


of developing


an understanding of


consortium processes


through


some


long


involvement with


respondents may


differently


today


have


from what


this


perceived


organizational

consortial co


they


time


form,


nflict


some con-


flict situations


actually


occurred.


Other


limitations


the data-gathering process


were:


failure


some


potential


respondents


respond;


incompleteness


inappropriateness


of some of


some of


instruments


returned;


respondents who


com-


pleted


instrument.


Justification


Study


The major


justification


this


investigation was


that


it will


serve


add knowledge


an area


in which


very


limited research has


been done.


This


investigation also










many unique characteristics


this


organizational


setting.


Secondly,


indicated in


the Introduction and


Review


Scholarly


was experiencing


Literature,


phenomenal


growth.


consortium movement


Franklin Patterson


(1974)


indicated


that between


1925


1965 only


con-


sortia


were


established


Eighty of


these organiza-


tions,


comprising


institutions,


were


listed


1973


Consortium Directory.


1977


Consortium Directory


listed


consortia.


Grupe and Murphy's


(1974)


Survey


of Statewide Agency/


Consortia


Relationship


revealed


that within


states


trend


toward


agencies


[was]


interrelating


clearly


consortia


and


in evidence"


coordinating


173)


More


specifically,


in 1973


study was


done


in California


determine


feasibility


of developing regional


consortia


for the


facilitation


a myriad of


higher


educational


endeavors


consortia


(Grupe


idea


& Murphy,


was


1974,


174)


considered in Florida


regional


during


1970s.


In fact,


a bill


entitled


"Senate


Bill


1003"


was


submitted


the Florida Legislature


1975.


Although


it did


pass


Senate,


the bill


was


revised


subsequent sub-


mission.


intent of


this


bill


was


amend


Section


93)a Q3n


P~~~r~~r4A~nr C4n4i4-r iN tr' ? -n -


nr;


~C~C11Cn~


nnr., rr t~CI re A nL:


YIM"T










In recent


years


a number of


municipalities


and school


districts


in several


states


have


formed


consortia


community


education endeavors.


formation of


Jacksonville,


Florida,


consortium


community


education


in 1975


illustrative of


this movement.


Economically,


consortium concept conveyed great


potential


its members


(Jordan,


1970;


Wells,


1967;


Zimmerman,


1968) .


This


seemed evident when issues of


institutional


services,


survival,


societal


quality


allocation of


and quantity


resources


of educational


education,


and other


was,


fully


factors


had


bridged


were


between


considered


theory


the extent


that


However,


practice


previously


the question


been success-


autonomous


institutions,


with


limited resources,


could


form a


collab-


orative association and not experience


conflict which


would


thwart


effectiveness


organic nation,


or bring


about its


demise?


Perhaps


attrition


rate of


consortia,


along with


frequency


turnover among


consortium


directors


. Patterson,


1974;


Patterson,


1973,


1975a;


Patterson


Burns,


1977) ,


could be


considered


indicative of


considerable


conflict within


these


associations.


According


unity


Simmel


that seems


(1955),


to be


very principle


needed by


embedded


nontraditional


I I I -. -


1~





I __ I I I










1970;


Lancaster,


1969;


Patterson,


1971b,


1975c;


Smith,


1966)


asserted


that considerably more


consortium should be


conducted.


research

It was


pertaining

further


suggested


that


these


research


results


should be


disseminated


among


segments


society


Patterson,


1974,


127-


128)


need


theoretically oriented analysis


as well


need


development of


theory


interorganizations


been addressed by


several


writers


(Clark,


1965;


Etzioni,


1960;


effort


Parsons, 1956


to overcome


Silverman


lack


, 1970)


of knowledge


Therefore,


between


in an


relation-


ship of


conflict


theory--as


reported


scholarly


literature--to


consortium,


field


portion of


this


study


involved a


representative


sample


consortia


throughout


continental


United States.


Assumptions


Four


this


assumptions


that were


study were developed by


this


critical


writer.


the success of

It was assumed


that:


Conflict is a

organizations


.n inevitable p

regardless of


phenomenon within

the organizational


structure


or purposes.










Conflict


theory


developed


traditional


organizations


applicable


consortium.


potential


respondents


will


not only


participate


but will


do so objectively.


Definitions


of Terms


Autonomous


institutions.


Postsecondary


educational


institutions


which


traditionally


have


operated


independ-


ently


of each


other.


Channeling of


information processing.


process


of limiting the


number


of organizational members


to whom


information is


transmitted.


Conflict.


A breakdown


standard mechanisms


decision-making


such


that an individual


or group experi-


ences


difficulty


in selecting


an action alternative


(March


Simon,


1965,


122)


Consortium.


A voluntary


association of


two or more


autonomous


institutions


formally organized


purpose


of satisfying

employment of


pertinent needs


an executive officer,


the membership.


consortium director,


exis tence


a board of


directors


are


required


criteria.


Consortium director.


chief


administrative officer


chief


---










Consortium resources.


facilities,


equipment,


staff,

other


etc.,


of an institution which are made


ins titutions


a result of


available


cooperation and coordina-


tion


engendered by


consortium.


Grants


gifts


that


consortium staff


secure


from other


sources


are


included


this


definition.


Informational


source.


A person


from whom information


pertaining


consortium originates.


Institutional


presidents.


chief


administrative


officers


institutions


participating


con-


sortium.


Interdependencies.


Relationships


in which


institu-


tional members


depend reciprocally upon each


other


in the


attainment of


goals.


Operationality


of goals.


The extent


to which


it is


possible


goals


to observe


are being


evaluate how well organizational


achieved.


Perceptions


of goals.


Views


held


concerning


consortium goals which


are


engendered by


a mutual


depend-


ency


on limited resources


and


the operationality


consortium goals.


Perceptions of


reality.


Views


held regarding


aspects


consortium which


are


engendered by


-I I- r a -' t -


.. _...


I ,I ,


r










regarding


a mutual


dependency


on limited resources


interdependence s


involving


scheduling


of activities


group consensus.


Referent


group.


Those


group members within


sample


population


that provided


necessary


data


this


study.


Theory.


A set of


assumptions


from which a


set of


empirical


laws


principles


may


be derived


(Griffiths,


1959,


18) .


Organization of


Research Report


Thi

chapter


study


reported


provided an


background of


five


introduction,


problem


chapters.


problem,

f the pr


statement o


first

including


*oblem;


delimitations


limitations


justification


study;


assumptions;


definitions


terms.


second


chapter


provides


devo ted


provides


Chapter


a review of


general


results


V presents


related


literature;


design of


and analysis of


the discussion,


study;


data


Chapter


Chapter


collected;


conclusions,


implica-


tions,


recommendations.
















CHAPTER II


CONFLICT THEORY


AND


RELATED


LITERATURE


This


chapter


is written in


sections.


first


section


March


includes


Simon's


a general


theoretical


treatment of


concepts,


conflict


conflict


theories,


resolu-


tion


conflict management.


Section


is concerned


specifically with


consortium.


Conflict


Theory


According to Griffiths


(1959),


theory


is essentially


a set of ass

(principles)


3umptions


may


direction.


from which a


be derived


serves


set of


empirical


It provides


as a guide


new


laws

a basis


knowledge


consequently


new


behavior


(Saunders,


Phillips


Johnson,


1966,


Further


theory


received


analysis


considerable


practical


agreement and


nature


uniformity


among


theoreticians.


Dewey


(1929)


stated


that


"theory


the end,


the most


practical


things"


Caladarci


Getzels


(1955)


asserted


tha t


"even










theory]


comes


from


ability


one


gains


from


the knowledge


theory which


because


enables


he knows


one


to act in specific


generality


[the]


situations


situations"


When


theory


taken in


context of


ideas


contained


scholarly


literature


that conflict is


inevitable


that it is


possibly


rampant


throughout society


(Boulding,


1963;


Follett,


1940;


Lipset,


1960


Schofield,


1975),


one


might ask,


there


a general


phenomenon of


conflict and


therefore


, a general


theory


that is


applicable


to all


domains of


society


endowed


with conflict?


Could it not be


said


that,


theories


of social


and human behavior


indeed address


themselves


distinct


goals


of predicting


events


providing


a basi


s for


understanding


these


events


as indicated by


Dubin


(1969),


then


there


are


universally


applicable


principles


that


underlie observed and classified


phenomena


According


Schofield


(1975)


, theory


implicitly


contains


predi


active element which


underlies


specified


operation,


conditions,


specific


that when certain principles


results


are


be predicted


Boulding


(1963)


contended


that


there


s a


general


theory


conflict and


presented


types


general


models


that were


purported


to be


universally


acceptable.


-










party.


A party


is a pair of


behavior


units


(persons,

capable of


theories

assuming


or organizations)


a number of


that are


different


positions


while


retaining


respective


identities


or boundaries


Behavior


space.


This


position of


behavior unit


at a moment of


time


as defined by


a set of


values


or a set of


variables


that


defines


the behavior unit.


These


variables


are


not


necessarily


continuous


or quantitatively measur-


able,


but must be


capable of


simple ordering


Competition.


Competition


in its


broadest sense


exists when


potential


positions


two


behavior


units


are mutually


Conflict.


Conflict is


incompatible


a situation


4).

of competition


in which


ability


each


parties


of potential


party wishes


are


future


aware


to occupy


incompati-


positions


a position


in which


that


incompatible


with


wishes


other


In Figure


Part


a contact


curve


(stretched


out


convenience


into a


straight


line)


, CW1


acceptability


C2W2


There


are










and a bargain


Figure


Part c,


can be

shows


struck at

a field of


W but


no other place.


acceptability,


W1W2,


that is


mutually


acceptable


set.


dynamics


bargaining,


changes


acceptability


set are


first


importance


(Boulding,


1953,


C1 W


Figure


The bargaining


area.


Several


very


sophisticated models


that depicted


con-


flict situations


were


also


presented by


Boulding


(1963)


These models


were


described


as:


"(a)


Richardson Process


n .. __ -- ---


n ,, I -- ---


fs










Other


organizational


theories


of conflict have


also


received recent attention.


Some of


these have


been


identified


zero-sum


theory,


game


bargaining


theories


(Deutsch,


1973;


March


Simon,


1958)


In regard to organizational


conflict,


some


writers


stressed


that attention should be


given


fact


that


an organization


iS a


very


complex


social


system and should


investigated with


this


fact


in mind.


Such


a system con-


of certain aspects


individuals


(Boulding,


input,


1961,


output and


43) .


Hence,


interaction


in its


normal


state,


"structure


the stable


equilibrium it


contains


the normative


constraints


organizational


conflict"


(Krupp,


1961,


161)


opinion


Scott


(1965),


conflict of many


descriptions--actual


or potential--is


present


in organiza-


tions


Follett


. 114) .

(1940),


However,


this


vernacular of


"conflict


neither


Mary


good nor


Parker


bad.


merely


represents


differences


of opinions


interests"


March and Simon's


Concept


According


to March


term


down


making


Simon


[conflict]
ie standard


that an


1958)


is applied


mechanism of


individual


to a break-


decision-


or group


sists










To support


this


position,


March


and Simon


(1958)


presented


three main classes


of conflict phenomena.


They


are:


individual


conflict or


conflict in individual


decision-making,


organizational


conflict or


group conflict


within an organization,


interorganizational


conflict or


conflict


between organizations


Individual


or groups.


conflict


Individual


conflict arises


three major ways which


can be


distinguished as


uncertainty.


individual knows


unacceptability,


case


probability


incomparability,


of unacceptability


distribution of


, the


the out-


come


associated


with each


alternative


action,


but


preferred alternative


individual knows


is inadequate.


probability


For


incomparability,


distributions


of out-


comes,


but cannot identify


a most preferred


alternative.


With


respect


uncertainty,


individual


aoes


not know


probability


distributions


connecting


behavior


choices


environmental


outcomes


(March


& Simon,


1958,


113)


further


characterize


individual


conflict,


March and


Simon


(1958)


developed


following


typology:










Bland alternative.


--An alternative which has


little

having


likelihood


of producing


either positive


or negative


a state of


affairs


value


individual.


Mixed alternative.


--An alternative which has


high


probability


of producing both


positively


negatively valued outcomes.


Poor


alternative.--An alternative


that


likely


to result in a


desirable outcome


likely


result in an


undesirable outcome.


Uncertain alternative.


--An alternative


in which


individual


does


not have a


conception of


probabilities


attached


114)


A summary


these


typologies


type of


conflict


created by


their


interaction


provided


Table


Figure


also


presents


conceptual


factors


underlying


individual


conflict.


Within


context of


types


of conflict illus-


treated


Table


writers


advanced


notion


that of


15 possible


situations


given,


no conflict


is anticipated


cases


because


alternatives


do not


present


dif-


ficulty


decision-making.


However,


the other


cases


represent


conflict


various


forms


incomparability,


. *


I


I .


I .


I -






















Table


A Typology


Individual


Conflict


Alternatives
A B Type of Conflict

1. Good Good Incomparability
2. Good Bland No conflict
3. Good Mixed No conflict
4. Good Poor No conflict
5. Good Uncertain No conflict
6. Bland Bland Unacceptability and
incomparability
7. Bland Mixed Unacceptability and
incomparability
8. Bland Poor Unacceptability
9. Bland Uncertain Uncertainty
10. Mixed Mixed Unacceptability and
incomparability
11. Mixed Poor Unacceptability
12. Mixed Uncertain Uncertainty
13. Poor Poor Unacceptability and
incomparability
14. Poor Uncertain Uncertainty
15. Uncertain Uncertain Uncertainty









































Figure


Factors


affecting


individual


alt



conflict


individual


reactions


to conflict.


Organizational


conflict:


individual


conflict


within an


organization


Organizational


conflict may


arise


two ways.


First,


decision pr

individual.


*oblems may


this


arise

case,


that are


primarily


problem may


intra-

that none of


the members


known acceptable


alternatives


terms


Subjective
uncertainty


Subjective
incomparability


Subjective
unacceptability


Perceived
conflict


Amount of
time pressure


Motivation to
reduce conflict










choices made


different individuals


the organization.


This


situation


in which


individual


participants


are not in


conflict but


organization


a whole


(March


Simon,


1958,


118)


From previous


hypotheses


possible


to predict


that


intraindividual


conflict within


the organization


most likely

organization


to occur when

al decision i


nvolv


conditions

e widespread


surrounding


uncertainty


or a


scarcity

quently,


regarding


acceptable


it is possible


factors


alternatives


formulate


of actions.


Conse-


hypotheses


affecting uncertainty:


greater


amount of


past experience with


a decision situation,


less


probable


that intraindividual


organizational


con-


flict will


arise;


less


the complexity of


decision,


less


probable


that intraindividual


organiza-


tional


conflict will


arise


(March


Simon,


1958,


119).


a result of


introspection


extrapolation


individual


behavior,


it is


possible


to predict


factors


affecting


acceptability with


respect


to a


general


disparity


between aspirations


and possible


achievement.


Then,


greater


disparity


between


aspiration


levels


achieve-


ment,


the higher


probability of


individual


conflict


within


organization.


This


usually


happens


when


TVn 1 ; I rnn Vn4- ,a, ,a r F 1 F~I'1%%an ~I'b'4 ,r vaar .


-^ /- A^ A3 -^.


1~ n r3 n rNn n n


nn~t; ~nnmn n C


nlr rr H ~n


r- r^/-












Munificence of
the environment




Aspiration level
and achievement





Subjective
unacceptability


Figure


Factors


affecting


individual


conflict


within


organizations


Organizational


conflict:


intergroup


conflict within an organization


general


absence


individual


conflict--


uncertainty


unacceptability--the mechanism


that


pro-


duces


disagreement


among


participants


in an


organization


thus


three


organizational


variables:


conflict may


existence of


summarized


a positive


terms


felt


need i


joint decision making,


a difference


in goals,


Complexity
of decision


Subjective
uncertainty


Perceived
conflict


.










Factors


affecting


felt need joint decisinn-


making.


Schachter


(cited


in March


Simon,


1958)


asserted


that where many


tional


individual


decisions,


decisions


potential


become


areas of


joint organiza-


conflict are


substantial


122)


. This


consistent with March and


Simon's


(1958)


position


that a


felt need


joint decision-


making


problems


an organization arises


in organizational


through


decision-making.


central


resource


allocation and scheduling.


More


specifically,


following


derivations


were


provided:


greater


the mutual


dependence


on a


limited


resource,


greater


felt need


joint


decision-making with


respect


that


resource;


greater


interdependence


timing


activities,


greater


felt need


joint


decision-making with respect


to scheduling.


122)


The mechanisms


underlying


these


propositions


are


readily


tion of


apparent,


resources


inequality


invol ve


and ambiguity


the most dramatic


the alloca-


situations


conflict in complex organizations


(Sherif


Sherif--cited


in March


Simon,


1958) .


long


there are


interdepend-


encies


associated with


scarce


resources


or scheduling


felt


ne ed


ioint


deci sinn-


-










Factors


affecting


differentiation of


goals.


Many


characteristics of


organizations


that affect differ-


entiation


of goals


among participants were


categorized


into


three broad areas:


Those


that affect


commonality


of individual


goals within


organization.


Those


that affect


clarity


consistency


reward structure and,


therefore,


reinforce-


ment system.


Those


that affect


compatibility of


individuals.


From


"the


these


less


characteristics was


subjective


derived


operationality


proposition,


of organizational


goals,


greater


the differentiation of


individual


goals


organization"


(March


Simon,


1958,


125) .


Factors


affecting


differentiations


of individual


perceptions.


Within


the organization,


the cognitive


processes


underlying decision-making


are major


factors


affecting


differentiation of


individual


perceptions.


cause


goals


there


a substantial


cognition,


individual


goals,


the greater


greater


interaction between individual


the differentiation of


differentiation of


individual


perceptions


vice


versa.


According


to March










Organization members may share


a common


source


of information.


formal


technique


processing


information


within an organization may provide


for wide


communication.


Informal


information


channels


may


provide wide-


spread


sharing


of information.


127)


From


those


statements,


following


set of


proposi-


tions was


derived:


greater


sources,


number


greater


ceptions within


greater


processing,


of independent information


the differentiation of per-


the organization.


channeling


greater


perception within


127)


of information-


the differentiation of


organization.


conceptual


outlines


framework


presented


the major propositions


in Figure


forth by


March


vividly


and Simon.


These


propositions


clearly


denote


relationship


between


units


within an organization.


There fore,


it should be


observed


that


closer


association between


units


subunits within


organization:


greater will


felt need


joint


decision-making,


less will


the differentiation of


goals,


less


will be


I -I *r I- 9 S


128)


.I





































Felt need


joint


decision


making


Figure


Factors


affecting


intergroup


conflict


within


an organic






Interorganizational


nation.






conflict


Most


writers


on conflict


have


adhered


view


that


interorganizational


conflict


organizational


conflict


are


svnonvmonus


nhenomena.


-A-~ X~n *.- I*-


Marchn


Ci mon


Munificence


environment


number


information


sources


Opera-
tionality
of
organiza-
tion goals


Channeling
of
information
processing


Intergroup
conflict


, I 1 1


I


.


1I J










present heading"


131)


This


assumption


paucity


interest


toward investigating


this


area hereto-


fore has


contributed


fact


that


very


little


literature


can be


found


that


specifically


relates


inter-


organizations.


Moreover,


those


who are beginning


to give


attention


area have


provided sufficient evi-


dence


to support or


contradict


theoretical


propositions


found


literature.


Conflict Resolution


Conflict


represents


a disequilibrium in


system


which generates

ceived. Some wa


motivation

vs in which


to change


this


it when it


might be


per-


accomplished are


presented in


Resolution of


following


individual


sections.


conflict within


the organization


"Conflict when dealt with


correctly,


an experience


of growth


personality.


In fact,


without conflict


there would be


little


need


to develop


new ways


behaving"


(Argyris,


1957,


With


respect


individual


conflict,


March


Simon


1958)


made


following


statements:


Where


the source


of conflict is


uncertainty,


individual


search


will


clarific


first


action of


increase


the consequences


*. S


r .t


I


1










individual


will


alternatives.


tion


to reduce


of search)


bland


search


strength


conflict


depends on


alternatives


(and


the
the


new


the motiva-


thus


rate


availability of


time


pressure


the other


hand,


where the
ability (b
time will


choice will


source


of conflict


ut not acceptability),


short.


Under


such


incompara-
decision
conditions


depend on attention and


sequence
(p. 116)


in which


alternatives


are


presented.


Resolution of


intergroup


conflict within


the organization


Within


organization,


"regularized means


are


involved

channels,


165,


settle


use


114-115)


conflicts,

them as c


course,


or direct


;onstructive


this may


them into

forces"


be done


harmless

(Scott,


in several


ways.


Four ways


presented by


March and Simon


(1958)


were:


problem-solving,


persuasion


, (c)


bargaining,


politicizing.


problem-solving,


it is


assumed


that


ectives


are


shared and


that


deci


sion problem is


identify


129)


assembling


a solution


Essentially,

information,


that satisfies


importance

increasing


shared


placed


criteria"


upon


search behavior


evoking


new alternatives.


Implicit in


use of


persuasion


belief


that,


-9~~~~ .9 9a 91 9


*


i 1'










goals


assumed


to be


fixed.


Hence,


agreement without


persuasion


sought.


other


hand,


politics


differs


from bargaining


that


the disagreement over


goals


fixed.


paper


entitled


"Constructive Conflict,


Mary


Parker


Follett


conflict.


These


proposed


were:


three


ways


domination,


resolution of


compromise


integra-


tion.


Domination


easiest way


of dealing with


conflict,


easiest for


the moment but not usually


successful


long run


. it


a victory


of one


side


over the


other"


31).


Comp romis e


generally


accepted


or approved way


of ending

promise,


controversy.


because


that means


no one


really wants


something will


have


com-


to be


given


Besides


that,


if we


only


compromi


conflict will


come
for


up again and
in compromise,


desire,
to rest


again in some


and because we


there,


whole


give
shal


sometime


our


sire.


other


up part of
1 not be c


shall


(Metcalf


form,
our


ontent
to get
Urwick,


1940,


33-35


use of


integration


resolve


confli


ct involves


three


ference


that


stages.


s into


differences


First,


open,


can be


an effort is made


since


integrated when


to bring


logical


they


dif-


to expect


are










Follett


(cited


in Metcalf


Urwick,


1940)


identified


the breaking up of wholes


into


their


constituent


parts


second step.


This


involves


breaking up


demands


both


sides.


Conversely,


one


often has


to do


opposite,


that is,


find


the whole


demand,


real


demand which


being


obscured by miscellaneous


claims


or by


ineffective


presentation


Anticipation of


response


third and


final


step


of integration.


mean necessarily


anticipation of


avoidance


conflict does


of conflict but simply


playing


interests


game


are


differently.


integrated


That


without making


the different


the moves


Metcalf


Urwick,


1940,


According


Simmel


(1955)


, conflict can actually


become


groups


the means of


within


strengthening


same organization.


relationship


This,


between


course,


illustrates


seldom considered


cons tructive


dimension


of conflict


Conflict Management


Follett


(1940)


and other writers


on conflict


(Burke,


1969;


Derr,


1972;


March


Simon,


1958)


have


presented


management and resolution strategies


dealing with


conflict situations.


In most instances,


however,


these










this


neglect has


contributed


practice


vogue


today


of using


these


concepts


interchangeably.


Conflict


(1977,


414)


disputes.


resolution


involves


However,


as described by


a process which


according


to Schofie


Levi


attempts

id (1975)


Benjamin


to resolve

and


others


(Follett,


1940;


LaTour


et al.,


1976;


March


Simon,


1958)


conflict


organizational


setting


is an


inevitable


phenomenon


which may


occur


or recur


at anytime


This


specific


means


conflict may


not only


not be


that


resolution of


permanent,


that new con-


flict


will


continually


arise within


the organization.


Conflict management,


the other


hand,


is a process


which


involves


controlling


conflict,


minimizing


effect


or bringing


an end


temporarily.


Hence,


compromise


strategy


outlined by


Follett


(1940,


or the bargaining


politicizing


strategies


advocated by March


Simon


(1958,


129)


illustrate


methods by which


conflict may


managed.


An increasing


number


of contemporary writers has


begun


to emphasize


importance of


conflict management con-


cept


tool


example,


dealing with


Feltner


Goodsell


conflict situations.


(1972


For


stated:


important
fundamental


4-1 a rn an F r


4-ha i'


recognize
igredient
n,~n 1 -F4I -i -


that


conflict


of change;
SI m-v /A/


I










adjusting
involves


permanence


instituting


to drain away and
destructive urges


pute.


of conflict


formal mechanisms


to channel


parties


the
to a dis-


. 711)


The Consortium


A review of


literature


revealed


that


consortium


is a phenomenon


which


evolved logically


from modern society.


Johnson


(1967)


advanced


notion


that


"this


phenomenon


is only


fitting modern


version of


voluntarism which


impressed De


Tocqueville


1830's"


343)


Mathews


(1974)


also maintained


that


inevitable


emergence


phenomenon of


institutional


cooperation has


origin


"American Experiment";


genius


getting work


done


through


kind


of voluntary


association observed by


Tocqueville


traveled


through America


1835


Perhaps


a most significant observation


regarding


principle


association


was made


this


prophetic


French-


man


when he


stated:


It is


easy


foresee


that


time


drawing


able


near when man


to produce,


will be
of himse


ess


alone,


commonest nece


(Cited


in Mathews,


ssarles


of life


1974)


consortium of


today


is more


than


informal


association of


individuals.


an organization










scarcity


resources


rendered


institutions


less


able,


individually,


Although


inadequacy


satisfy


literature


research


needs of


review


involving


their


disclosed

consortiu.


constituency.


a general

m, it also


revealed


that


field


inundated


with


synonymous


expressions


as:


alliances,


cooperatives,


federations,


con-


federations,

cooperation,


interinstitutional


multiagency


cooperation,


cooperation,


interagency


interorganizational


cooperation,

diversity as


intergovernmental


Exemplified by


these


agreement.

expressions


Such

incorporates


many


kinds of


associations.


illustrate


further,


Levine


et al.


(1969)


defined


intergovernmental


agreements


"arrangements


under which one


or more governmental


units


conduct an activity


jointly


or in cooperation


with


one


more


governmental


units"


128)


Webster's


New


Inter-


national


Dictionary


defines


consortium as


"any


association


a common


end.


" Hansen


(1974)


described


consortium as


"an association of


interest of


two or more


parties"


However,


purpose of


this


study,


these


trans-


positional


formal


expressions will


association of


refer


explicitly


two or more


autonomous


to a voluntary


institutions.


Within


context of


above


definition,


following


criteria,


as outlined


1977


Consortium


i-i rectonrv .


Were


sat.i fi sfed -


Pa~~h


cn nsonrti urn *


^Was a










tangible


institutions,


evidence of


long-term commitment of member


had multiacademic programs


(Lancaster,


1969;


Patterson,


1975a;


Patterson


Burns,


1977)


Statutory


ephemeral


bodies,


ad hoc


informal bilateral


combinations


agreements,


were excluded.


Historical


Development


the Concept


Lewis


Patterson


(1975b)


asserted


that,


although


organizational


independence has


been a


deeply


rooted


tradi-


tion,


cooperation


by no means a


new phenomenon


For


example,


founding


Oxford


College


1249


been cited by


scholars


the beginning


cooperation


between


institutions


of higher education


Among


American


institutions


of higher


education,


Lewis


Patterson


(1975b)


reported


that


"the


first


voluntary


association


together


of colleges


academic


United


purposes was


States


formally


the Claremont


Coll


joined


eges


in 1925"


Shortly


after


this


beginning,


in 1929,


the Atlanta


University Center was


begun


Patterson,


1974,


Subsequent


this,


however,


the momentum acceler-


ated


such


that


institutions had


formed


consortia


1965


Patterson,


1971b,


Inconsistent with


latter were


results


obtained by


another


1965


survey


which revealed


that


there


were


1,017


consortia


in existence










formal


organization or


independent


government"


342)


1974,


approximately


consortia


involving


nearly


1,000


institutions


of higher


education had been organized


Patterson,


1974,


132-170).


year


later,


this


number


increased


1,100


institutions


consortia


Patterson,


1975a,


As of


this


writing,


a substantial


number


cooperative arrangements


formal


linkage


systems


been


organized


throughout


country


(Connors


et al.,


1974;


Patterson,


1975c,


1976;


Patterson


Burns,


1977).


Consortium Typologies


Although


variety


of characteristics


typical


among


consortia


as well


possible


uniqueness of


each


one


formed makes


it difficult


to categorize


them,


a number


efforts


have been made


sort


them out


provisionally


(Andrew, 1964;

Patterson, 1970


a congruent


Connors

; Wilson,


position


et al.,

1965) .


when he


1974;


Donovan,


Lancaster


advanced


1965;


(1969)


the notion


provided


that


although


the movement


is characterized by


little


consensus


typologies,


the extant


literature


focu


ses


on such


distinguishing


characteristics


voluntary


or statutory,


or multiinstitutional,


partial


and institutionally


'bilateral'
(3)
restricted










In Guide


Interinstitutional Arrangements:


Voluntary


Statutory,


Connors


and associates


(1974)


utilized a


comprehensive


typology which


included


such


categories


as:


formal multipurpose


consortia,


Title


cooperative


arrangements,


cooperative


library


arrangements,


special


purpose consortia,

associations of pr


state


divate


systems,

colleges


interstate


and


compacts,


universities,


state


national


higher


education associations,


international


educational


cooperatives.


Perhaps


the most extensively used


typology


field


today


one


advanced by


Franklin


Patterson


(1974)


This


tripartite


typology


refers


to collaborative


arrange-


ments


cooperative,


service,


Title


consortia


Cooperative


consortia.


primary


purpose of


coopera-


tive


consortia,


to a greater


lesser


degree,


been


joint academic


However,


planning


a secondary


cooperative


and overlapping


academic programming.


purpose has been


provide a


service


function.


Service


consortia.


These


consortia


utilize


cooperation


principally


to provide


their


constituent


institutions


with


one


or more


services.


These may


or may not be


academic


nature.


As of


this


writing,


there


were


three


types


em~~~~~~~~~~mr C' Y tnr 1cn 1% n -C -- ,ah1 -, nl m


-r nt-ti 1. ..r~i v'r'r


nnn rr nvC; 7


rr n. Y1Tlnn


'- lV -^










survival


life.


often


These


isolated


institutions


from


were


the mainstream of


provided assistance


academic


through


provisions


Title


Higher


Education Act of


1965,


such


that


they might be


able


to ameliorate


themselves


through


cooperation


with other


institutions.


They were


more often referred


"developing


institutions"


Patterson,


1974,


24) .


According


to Hodgkinson


(1974),


prior


this


act,


many


institutions


comprising


Title


consortia


. were


in danger


of extinction"


46) .


Economic


Potential


logic


consorting


evolved,


conceptually,


from


the notion

members to


resource


scarce


that


collaboration should enable


benefit economically


pooling,


resources,


through mutual


joint management of


and by


.rticipating

association

latively


efficient allocation of


resources


to satisfy


institutional


needs


Patterson,


1974,


. This


belief,


along with


inherent


possi-


abilities


limiting


duplication


competition,


caused many


contemporary writers


express


con-


currlng


opinions


regarding


great economic potential


the consortium


Johnson,


1967;


Jordan,


1970;


Zimmerman,


1968)


Wells


1967)


stated


that










In addressing


the question of


consortium economics,


Lewis


Patterson


(1971b)


advanced


notion


that


one


regarding
consortia
increase
diminish


few clear
financial


that an


its


cut answers


implications of
institution will


operational


them,


costs,


a result of


joining


a multipurpose


consortium.


A different


opinion


was


provided by


Elliott


(1974)


when he


stated


that


consortium of


educational


institu-


tions


save


usually


two objectives--to


money"


further


improve


quality


justified his


assertion


as he discussed


operations


the consortium in which


institution


a member.


We have
tional


students


broadened and


improved


programs by making


tak e


courses


educa-


it easy r
at several


institutions.


We have


saved money


and


improved


services


through


common


purchasing.


Although


ultimate goal


of cooperation among post-


secondary


institutions may


to expand


educational


opportunities


while


preserving


diversity


among


institu-


tions,


Miller


(1974


believed


that


the end result


should be


more


effic


ient


utilization of


resources


Perhaps


it will


suffice


to conclude


that,


even


though


consortium seems


to have


unlimited


potential,


"until


comprehensive


data


are


acquired


through


research,


their










Organizational


Structure


interinstitutional


consortium usually


involves


institutions


of higher


education


such


as community


colleges,


colleges,


universities.


Each has


a board of


directors,


an executive director,


a staff,


an executive


committee


possibly


numerous


ad hoc and


standing


committees


(Grupe,


1975;


Patterson,


1974)


the majority


these


formal


organizations


Franklin Patterson


(1974)


observed


a simple


form of


gover-


nance.


The board


of directors


consisted


presidents


the member


institutions


and had


responsibility of


formulating policies


the organization.


Beneath


board may


a number of


characteristically,


with


institutional


one member


committees,


from each


institutions


involved.


These


committees were


valuable


the director


that


they provided


for:


an exchange


of novel


ideas


across


institutional


lines,


the development of


the development of


new programs


faculty


consideration,


commitment


organization.


(pp.


43-44


Governance


Decision-making










articles of


incorporation and by-laws,


statements of


agreements,


and oral


agreements


3628A)


According


to Franklin Patterson


(1974),


the economies


consortia


take


their


configuration


in response


to a


continuing


tendency


for participating


institutions


pursue


essentially


autonomous directions,


irrespective


the kind


umbrella


they


are


under.


Secondly,


tendency


participating members


to leave


governance


the hands


institutional


presidents,


who


themselves


represent


institu-


tional


autonomy


who


reflect


competing


constituency


pressures


decision-making processes


internal


their


institutions,


accounts


very


limited


power of


directors.


This


germane


issue could affect


survival


service


consortia


future


Service


consortia.


board


usually very


large


unable


to meet


conveniently with any


great


frequency.


According


to Franklin Patterson


(1974)


as a decision-making
consortium board is


body
less


the
than


service
likely


involve


president-directors deeply


frequently


that a


and one


seat on


gains


the board


impression


service


consortium


tends


rate


very


in a


coll


ege president'


priorities.


In fact,


there


were


instances


where


a member


insti-


tution' s


financial


commitment


a service


consortium


43)


. 45)










reached.


The director's


leadership exists


only


extent


to which he


is able


to persuade


institutions'


presidents.


Most


importantly,


first


perceived


objec-


tive of


institutional


presidents


save money--to


maintain a minimal


investment


consortium operations


with


the hope


that something


good


will happen


Patterson,


1974,


46-48)


Cooperative


consortia.


The cooperative consortium


presents


a different


set of


conditions


governance.


Cooperation requires


participating


that


chief


colleges


executive officers


universities


sit on


governing


board,


as only


presidents


can


commit


their


institutions


significant cooperative


arrangements.


ultimate decision-making power must


therefore be


vested


presidents


Accordingly,


Patterson,


1974,


a consortium of


48-49


this kind


can diffuse


subordinate


institutions


operating


in order


leadership


secure


among


continuing


participating


initiative on


each


campus.


This


possible because


active


involvement


can be maintained


among


participating


institutions


through consortium-related officers


responsible


to both


their


individual


institutions


consortium.


example


this


that


an assistant director


on each


campus










Potential


a good relationship


between


president and


consortium director;


Conmmi tment


concept of


interinstitutional


cooperation


Ambassadorial


general;

ability;


Relationship with


faculty


at home


institution;


Interest


in a


particular


aspect of


consortium operations.


Patterson,


1974,


this


kind


of consortium,


principal mission


assistant


sortium


director


integral


institution'


to work


a part of


own


autonomous


toward making


his or her own


program


con-


campus


Patterson,


1974,


Institutional


autonomy.


consortium evolved


from


an environment

self-government


characterized by


a strong


tradition for


independent development among


colleges


universities.


So deeply


entrenched was


isolationism


among postsecondary


institutions


that only


during


past


decades


have


significant cooperative


arrangements


emerged


(Jordan,


1970,


Aiken and Hage


(1968)


others


(Jordan,


1970;


Patterson,


1974)


observed


that
















resources


915)


For


example,


Averill


(1974)


stated


that


'autonomy'


s a


simple-minded,


fac
be


t


that many


little more


single-minded,


attempt


not


account


f


a consortium appears


than a


clutch


to
or
to


separate


institutions
lust after T


held


itle


together
II funds.


a common


Another view


autonomy


issue


was


provided by


Averill


(1974)


when he


suggested


that


the blame


for the


failure


many


consortia has


been


placed on


institutional


autonomy


rather


than


consortium staff.


In regard


to compulsory


coordination of


postsecondary


institutions


that even


and/or


though


state


there


agencies,


some writers maintain


recognized need


cooperation


coordination among


these entities,


there


also a


general


reluctance


to engage


in such


efforts


(Hansen,


1974;


Wattenbarger


& Hansen,


1975)


Perhaps


this


aversion may


appropriately


summarized by


Institutional


ese


consortia
. Such


days,


ought


following:


autonomy is,
an essential


to protect


compulsory


particularly
value which


perpetuate.


coordination


likely


to have


bad results:


uniformity


provincialism.


(Averill,


1974,


Conflict


Within


the Consortium


When


reality


autonomy


inherent competi-


tion characteristic of


institutions


in a


consortial


rela-










substantially


threatened by


conflict.


Jordan


(1970)


discussing


this


idea,


advanced


the notion


that


inter-


action of


two


forces


that operate within


consortium--the


drive


autonomy


the movement


cooperation--engenders


third


force,


conflict


173)


Another


study


revealed


that cooperation led


competition and


conflict.


However,


most


conflict


was


directed


toward


central


office of


consortium


(Lancaster,


1969,


This


observation


is very much


consistent


with


views


held


West


(1968)


regarding


emergence


of conflict and


competition


with


increased


levels


interdependencies


cooperation and


conflict are basic


inter-


dependent relationship


existing


in a


consortium,


some


writers


Hylton,


have


1962;


stated


West,


(Lancaster,


1968)


1969,


then


1970;


Litwak


possible


that


degree


sortium


age,


of conflict


could


size,


within


correlate


predictable


positively with


heterogeneity


areas


such


number


con-


variables


services


per-


formed.


In support of


preceding


idea


the assertion by


Lancaster


(1969)


that


conflict


which


develops within


consortium seemed


to cluster


around


four


central


problem


r c










Heterogeneity


of member


institutions


attempting


to seek


common goals,


Administrative


procedures


consortium develops.


(pp.


and management as


81-82)


One of


the conclusions


reached by


Silverman


(1970)


subsequent


to his


study


consortium provides


additional

concluded


information on membership heterogeneity.

that


reward


laden


when


function will


be less


the organizational


tives have heterogeneous


operational
tions, or n


goals,
eeds.


conflict-


representa-


or complementary


perspectives,
p. 5213A)


expecta-


an Approach


to Community


Education


Fundamental


consortium concept


coordination necessary


to reduce


is cooperation


competition and


eliminate


waste


caused by unnecessary


duplication of


resources.


basic


tenet of


this


concept,


growth


and development,


in many ways


remarkably


congruent


community


education movement of


today.


The community


educa-


tion


concept emerged


1920s


(Clapp,


1939,


did


consortium concept.


Like


consortium movement,


the community


education movement,


reported by Olsen and


Clark


(1977),


been


gaining momentum in


this


country


past half


century


(pp.


62-73)


In fact,


consortium










the country.


National


Center


of Community


Education


Martin


Seay,


1974,


367) ,


Jacksonville


Consortium


(Ordinance


75-109-68),


Independent


School


District


relationship with


City


of St.


Louis


Park


are


explicit


illustrations.


components of


community


However,


when


education are


philosophy


viewed


in conjunction


with


the basic


apparent


that


premises of


ideals


the consortium,


consortium are


is readily


included


among


those of


community


education.


According


to Clark


(Note


other


proponents


the community


education movement


(Decker,


1975;


Kerensky,


1974)


, community


education.


This


education

philosophy


an operational


emphasizes


philosophy


interinstitutional


interagency


cooperation and


coordination as


one


major


components.


Another


component emphasizes maximum


utilization of


Both


available


these


resources


components


(Olsen


are


Clark,


essential


1977,


the con-


sortium concept.


summary,


perhaps


it suffices


that


community


education


advocates


perceive


the consortium as


an appro-


private


delivery


system


that may


substantially


satisfy


specific


components


this


provocative movement.


This


clearly


evident


views


expressed by


Heath


and Seay










community


agencies


organized


for the


purpose


of coordinating


community


educational


activities"


332)


A 1973


survey


conducted by


the American Association


of Community/Junior


Colleges


provided


concurring


results.


This


survey


revealed


existence


colleges


a common desire


"increase


within


interinstitutional


the community/junior


cooperation as


way


of expanding


services of


community


junior


colleges


to society.


" (Witter,


1974,


The overall design of


study


the methods


utilized


are


presented


following


chapter.

















CHAPTER III

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY


procedures


utilized


in the


study


are


presented


this


chapter


Design and Methodology.


Five headings


are


provided


this


purpose:


Overview


Study


Design,


ample,


Instrumentation,


Data


Collection,


Data Analysis.


Overview and Study


Design


this


theoreticians


study,


theoretical


advocated


as being


propositions

capable of


which


predicting


conflict


in an


organic


national


interorganizational


setting were


identify


ed from


literature.


The degree


to which


these


propositions


were


effective


in predicting


conflict


the consortium,


an interorganizational


setting,


determined by

presidents of


perceptions of


institutional


consortium directors


members.


Additional


analyses


were


made


to determine


whether


or not relationships


existed between


these


propositions.


Analyses


were also,










literature


suggested


as being probable


determinants


conflict


the consortium.


field


portion


this


study was


conducted


in four


phases.


first


phase


involved


identification of


target


population


subsequent


selection


of a sample


from


this


population.


Phase


involved


the development of


an instrument


which


could appropriately


address


questions


under


investigation


this


study.


This


process


is explained


instrumentation


section below.


Data


gathering was


exclusive


concern of


third


phase.


This


process


involved


sample


population


as well


several


widely used


publications.


fourth


and


final


phase


required


that


the writer


analyze


the data


terms


questions


which


gave


direction


this


study.


For


purpose,


well


established


statistical


procedures


were


utilized.


research


design


this


study


post


fact


involves,


discussions


primarily,


sample,


survey


technique


instrumentation,


In-depth


data


collection


data anal


components


this


technique


are


pro-


vided


following


sections.










references


this endeavor were


1977


Consortium


Directory,


"Profiles


of Consortia"


the book,


Colleges


in Consort.


hundred


fifteen


voluntary


interinstitutional


consortia


were


listed


these


publica-


tions.


sample


population was


derived


from


total


population in a manner which


ensured adequate


representa-


tion


research


questions.


this


respect,


stratification and


randomization


were necessary


components of


sampling procedure.


ensure


an adequate


representation


of consortia


various


sizes,


entire consortium population was


stratified


into


four


groups


consortia:


those


con-


sisting


a membership


, (b)


those


consisting


of a membership between


and 10,


those


consisting of


a membership


between


11 and


those consisting


a membership of


or more.


From


stratification,


five


consortia


from each


group were


randomly


selected


for this


portion of


sample


population.


Randomization was


achieved


through


use


table of


random numbers.


previously


selected


sample


size


variable


was


used


to determine


variable.


This was done by


stratifying


sample


derived


size


variable


into










this


procedure


did not


provide a minimum of


five members


to each


age group,


last


groups


had


fewer


than


five members.


Because


this


situation,


further


selection by


random process


was


conducted


until


each of


these


groups had acquired


minimum number of


five


con-


sortia.


To obtain a


sample


consortia


to represent a broad


continuum of


services


services,


that each


writer


consortium


obtained


provided


number


membership


from


1977


Consortium Directory.


Consortia


previously


selected


size


variables were


then strati


field


into


three groups.


These


stratifications


consisted


consortial


groups


those


that


provided 10


different


services


those


that


provided


dif-


ferent


services,


those


that


provided


or more


different


services.


This


procedure


satisfied


established


criteria


at least


five


consortia


to each


category.

Criter


Therefore,


that were


further

utilized


selection was

to determine


necessary.


whether


not a


consortium i


composed of homogeneous


or heterogeneous


members


were


organized


into


six categories.


principal


references


were


that were


the Education


utilized


Directory


to derive

Colleges


these

and U


categories


universities


-. F' A. -- t .


- -


(b


In~r rri ,I


.. i I


F


P


1










Degrees


Offered by


College and


Subject.


this


respect,


each


consortium was


analyzed


to determine


whether or


institutional members


had approximately


same


enrollment,


same


calendar,


had approxi-


mately


same


financial


status,


were


public or


private,


were


sectarian


or nonsectarian,


were


four-year


institutions,


two-year


institutions,


or graduate


degree


granting


institutions


only.


Homogeneity


or heterogeneity was


determined by


extent


to which


consortium membership differed


in congruency with


these


criteria.


For example,


the members of


a consortium


were not


sectarian,


then


this


represented one


criteria


where


the membership differed.


With


these


parameters


established,


this


portion of


sample


population


was


determined by


grouping


consortia


previously


selected


the age


size


variables


into


categories


those differing


criteria


less,


those dif-


fering


three


four


criteria,


those differing


five


or more


criteria.


Since


this


procedure


satisfied


established


criteria


at least


five


consortia


each


category,


further


selection was


needed.


conclusion of


process


outlined above,


consortia


comprising


secondary


institutions


had


-t .- S .t


r.l rr


r


r


I










Instrumentation


ins trument


used


to collect


data


for this


study


was


a structured opinionnaire.


writer


according


It was


factors


designed by


literature which were


relevant


problem in


A Likert-type


scale


study


consistent with illustrations


cited


Turney


and Robb


(1971,


140)


was


utilized.


This


type


sca


allowed


ass


ignment of


numerical


values


available


responses


eac


h item on


the opinionnaire.


Hence,


respondents


responses


were


readily


transferable


into


numerical


values.


first draft of


instrument was


submitted


several


experts


within


the consortium movement.


These


experts


were


requested


to evaluate


this draft of


instru-


ment


terms


of item appropriateness


clarity.


They


were


also


asked


to make


recommendations


regarding


overall


their


format of


opinion


instrument


would assist


items


in accomplishing


which


objectives


study.


recommendations


that


were


provided


resulted


in a


major


revision of


first


draft of


instrument.


Con-


sequently,


items


wh.,


sought demographic


information,


or data


which


were


already


available










additional


information


included.


Finally,


several


open-


ended


items


were


added


form of .the


instrument which


was

that


designed for

these items


the

would


consortium directors.


d


provide


It was


the writer with


suggested


descriptive


information


that would allow


a better understanding of


respondents'


responses.


Subsequent


this


revision


and consistent


with


recommendations


consortium experts


the writer's


doctoral


committee,


instrument was


then


submitted


another


group of


experts


within


consortium movement.


Information obtained from


this


panel


indicated


that


further


revision


wa s


necessary.


This


study


involved


two


different


groups of


respon-


dents.


Hence,


writer


developed


forms


of parallel


instruments


Appendix C


these


complete


different referent


derivation of


groups.


these


(See


forms of


the data


collection


instruments.)


Data


Collection


procedures


were employed


data


collection


process.


first of


these


involved an


instrument


designed on


order


structured


opinionnaire.


second


procedure


involved


writer


ascertaining


demo-










opinionnaire,


along with a


cover


letter,


general


information sheet,


ana a


return envelope were mailed


referent


were


group members.


subsequently


After


conducted.


thi

Each


mailing,


follow-up


two

took


follow-

place


approximately


days


following


preceding mailing.


Data Analysis


The

study was


principal st

chi-square.


:atistical

According


procedure u

a to Roscoe


tilized in


this


(1975)


others


(Babbie,


1973;


Fox,


1969)


this


statistical


technique


testing


provides


research


researchers


questions


with


a generalized


involving


procedure


tributions


con-


training


was


nominal


utilized,


or higher order


therefore,


data


to determine


whether


Chi-square

the observed


frequency


distribution or


frequency


that


re spon-


dents


selected a


particular


response differed significantly


from


expected


frequency


distribution


these


responses.


An additional


purpose of


chi-square


test


was


to determine


there


were


significant differences


between


responses


of consortium directors


presidents


institutional


members.


For


these


analyses,


level


significance


was


considered


suitable.


Another purpose


the data


analysis was


to determine










computer program


Package


utilized


Social


this


Sciences,


analysis,


included


Statistical


correlational


procedures:


Kendall'


Tau and


Pearson's


Both


these


procedures


were


appropriate


this


study,


since


data representing


three


levels


of measurement were


needed


answer


research questions


study,


Kendall'


Tau being


especially


suited


ordinal


data.


However


satisfy


procedural


consistency


requirement of


one


procedure


within a


study,


Pearson Product Moment


Correla-


tion


was


utilized


principal


correlational


procedure.


Kendall'


was


merely used


substantiate


findings


Pearson's


In conjunction


with


above,


types


of comparisons


were


conducted.


comparison


was


between


responses made


consortium directors


a group


versus


collective


membership of

Secondly, com


presidents of


parsons


institutional members.


were made between responses


provided


consortium directors


presidents


of institu-


tional members


within each


consortium.


Results of


data


analysis


forth


this


chapter


are


presented


in Chapter
















CHAPTER IV

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS OF DATA


This


chapter


first section


presented


is a review of


three sections.

questions under


The

investi-


nation in


this


study.


Secondly,


introduction which


follows

results


questions

presented.


describes the

This section


format by which


contains


a discussion


return rate


initiates


presentation of


data.


third and


final


section


reports


findings


study.


Research


Questions


To what extent do


consortium directors,


institutional


presidents


agree


with


statement,


the greater


membership


s dependency upon


a limited


consortium resource,


joint decision-making


greater


the membership'


regarding


allocation of


desire


that


resource?


What


extent


to which


consortium










activities


to occur,


greater


the desire


joint decision-making


regarding


scheduling?


What


relationship


between


extent


which


consortium


goals


are


achieved


extent


which


consortium goals


perceived by


of institutional members


consortium directors,


and


differ


institutional


presidents?


To what extent do


consortium directors,


institutional


presidents


agree


with


statement,


greater


within


number


consortium,


of independent informational


greater


sources


difference


membership'


perception of


consortium?


To what extent do


consortium directors,


institutional


greater


presidents


channeling


agree


with


of information


statement,


within


consortium,


greater


difference


the membership


s perception


consortium?


What


relationship between


consortium and


to be


engendered


extent


to which


within areas


conflict is


predicted by


perceived

theoretical


propositions?


What effect does


size


consortium


membership


have


upon


extent


to which


conflict is





--










to which

areas pr


conflict is


edicted by


perceived


to be


theoretical


engendered within


propositions?


What effect does homogeneity or


heterogeneity of


consortium membership


have


upon


the extent


to which


conflict


is perceived


to occur within areas


predicted by


theory?


Introduction


Results of


analyses


variables


under


investigation


centages


are


and media


reported

n scores.


terms


Chi-square


frequencies,


tests


per-


and Pearson


Product Moment Correlation


were


also


utilized


purpose


illustrating


interrelationships


among


and be-


tween


the dependent


independent variables.


Statistical


analyses of


these


variables


are


presented


tabular


form


this


section.


In addition


tabular


presentation,


format


data


presentation also


includes


narratives.


These


descriptions outline


the manner


in which


respondents


responded


to each


variable.


Research


questions


one


through


five


represent


theoretical


basis


study.


These questions


contain


the dependent


variables


which


are


reported


this


chapter










other

factor


factors

s are r


associated


with


referred


consortium.


"age,


" "size,


These


" "service,


"homogene i ty/he te rogenei ty"


variables.


total


opinionnaires


were


mailed


adminis-


trators


in 30


consortia.


Included


were


institutional


presidents


consortium directors.


hundred


seventy


-six


questionnaires


were


returned by


these


adminis-


trators.


combined


This


referent


represented


a return


groups.


rate of


opinionnaires


that


were mailed


consortium directors,


23 were completed


returned.


this


This


group.


represented


presidents


a return rate


institutional members


returned


opinionnaires mailed


them.


return rate of


was


achieved


from


this


group of


respon-


dents.


these


returns,


however,


or 53% were


completed.


Only


completed opinionnaires


were


used


statistical


analysis


this


study.


return


rate of


opinionnaire


this


study


reflects


a high


degree of


cooperation among


referent


group


members.


This


was


particularly


gratifying


since


recent research


that involved mailed


questionnaires


this


population did


not achieve


comparable


results.


It was


also


satisfying because


many


authors


research


texts










than


or 50


percent are


common.


Higher


percentages


are


rare "


414)


The obtained


rate


return


was


not without much


effort.


opinionnaires


follow-up


were


requests


conducted.


return of


(See Appendix D


follow-up


were


letters


However


received subsequent


, analy


to each


returns


follow-up


letter


that


did not


reveal


a response


pattern


which


differed


from


initial


returns.


This


suggests


that


returns


received after


follow-ups


were


not biased


in any way.


Results of


a chi-


square


also


comparison of


revealed no


nonrespondents


statistically


respondents


significant difference


between


groups.


Results


Findings


An examination of


responses


provided by


con-


sortium directors


presidents of


institutional


members


revealed


that no difference


existed between


these


respondents'


responses


dependent variables.


There-


fore,


these


data


were


combined


composite


analysis


reported


in Table


This


table


illustrates


frequency


percentage


distributions


responses


dependent variables.


In addition


these


types


-- F











Tabi


A Profile


the Compo


site


Responses


Theoreti


Propositionsa


Variables SAb A N D SD Median


Resource 52 67 23 8 2
(34.2) (44.1) (15.1) (5.3) (1.3) 1.86

Scheduling 46 77 24 5 -
(30.3) (50.7) (15.8) (3.3) 1.89

Goals 32 76 35 8 1
(21.1) (50.0) (23.0) (5.3) ( .7) 2.08

Informational 20 50 46 34 2
Source (13.2) (32.9) (30.3) (22.4) (1.3) 2.63

Information 34 53 48 17 -
Channeling (22.4) (34.9) (31.6) (11.2) 2.29


aNumbr
bi


in parentheses


headings


indi


cate


shown


percentages


" "A


" "N


D," and


represent:
and strongly


s trongl


sagree


agree


agree


neither


agree


nor


agree


, disagree,


respective


upon


limited


membership


allocation


consortium


s desire


that


resource


joint


resource


decis


Tabi


, the


greater


ion-making


shows


regarding


that


res


pondents


were


in agreement


with


this


proposition.


Only


res


pondents


disagreed.


In addition,


median


score


was


well


within


acceptable


range


of median


scores


these


results.










proposition


membership


that


in joint


"the greater


involvement of


activities which require


scheduling


times


activities


to occur,


greater


the desire


joint decision-making


regarding


scheduling.


" Even


though


3.3%


administrators


disagreed with


this


state-


ment,


not one checked


"strongly


disagree"


category.


However,


15.8%,


indicated


that


they


neither


agreed


nor


disagreed.


Table


illustrates


that


respondents were


in agreement


with


theory


pertaining


to goals.


Further


analysis


these data


illustrates


that


21.1% of


administrators


strongly


agreed


with


statement,


while


indicated


that


they


agreed.


the other


hand,


.0% of


respondents


not agree


with


theory.


this


total,


.3% checked


"disagree"


category.


Only


.7% of


the respondents


indicated


strong


disagreement.


Administra-


tors


who could


not agree


or disagree


represented


23.0


respondents.


Data


presented


Table


show


that


respondents


agreed


with


assumption


that


"the greater


the number


of independent


informational


sources


within


consortium,


greater


the difference


the member-


ship


s perception


consortium,


" while


3.7% disagreed.










"information


channeling"


variable


presented


Table


indicates


that 57.3% of


the respondents


agreed


with


assumption


that


"the greater


channeling of


informa-


tion


within


consortium,


the greater


the difference


the membership


s perception


consortium.


this


total,


22.4%


strongly


agreed.


Although


11.2% of


respondents


disagreed with


this


assumption,


not one


these


administrators


disagreed


strongly.


Perhaps


is more


significant


to observe


that


31.6%


the respondents


indicated


that


they


neither


agreed nor


disagreed


with


this


assumption.


Further


ascertain


response


square

chance


examination of


whether


pattern of


statistical


was


the data


was


or not relationships


two groups


treatment at


considered adequate


these


conducted


existed


within


administrators.


level


analyses.


Chi-


signifi-

Results


these analyses


are


reported


following


sequence


tables.


Table


shows


that


institutional


presi-


dents


agreed


with


theoretical


assumption


pertaining


resource


sharing.


This


compares


with


82.6% of


the con-


sortium directors who exhibited a


concurring


opinion.


assumption


was


not agreeable


to 7.0%


presidents


and


Aa ~ ~ ~ ~ nhn~: l 4- ...1 a- r -4 4,.rn A4-r .4 ~rr lrar~Aan4.v ,4


nY I\~;~nnC~


7nrl ;I; rnnCnr~


A 70.


L Lk










Table


Resource


Row
SA A N D SD Total

45 55 20 7 2 129
34.9 42.6 15.5 5.4 1.6 84.9
Presidents 86.5 82.1 87.0 87.5 100.0
29.6 36.2 13.2 4.6 1.3


7 12 3 1 0 23
30.4 52.2 13.0 4.3 0.0 15.1
Directors 13.5 17.9 13.0 12.5 0.0
4.6 7.9 2.0 0.7 0.0

COLUMN 52 67 23 8 2 152
TOTAL 34.2 44.1 15.1 5.3 1.3 100.0


Note:


Chi-square


= 0.99


aNumbers


in each


cell


represent


count,


row


percentage,


column percentage,


Column headings


total


shown as


II N,


percentage.


I,


" and


"SD"


repres


ent:


strongly


agree,


agree


neither


agree


nor


disagree


, di


sagree,


strongly


sagree,


respe


actively.


A chi-square


value of


0.99


level


revealed


that


groups


of respondents did


not differ


in any


statistically


significant degree


the manner


in which


they


responded


this


variable.


It is observable


from


data


Table


that both


groups


administrators


agreed


very


highly with


propo-


" SA


it "A,










Table


Scheduling


b Row
SA A N D SD Total

38 66 21 4 0 129
Presidents 29.5 51.2 16.3 3.1 0.0 84.9
82.6 85.7 87.5 80.0 0.0
25.0 43.4 13.8 2.6 0.0


8 11 3 1 0 23
Directors 34.8 47.8 13.0 4.3 0.0 15.1
17.4 14.3 12.5 20.0 0.0
5.3 7.2 2.0 0.7 0.0

COLUMN 46 77 24 5 0 152
TOTAL 30.3 50.7 15.8 3.3 0.0 100.0


Note:


Chi-square


= 0.45;


aNumbers
percentage,


in each
column i


cell


represent


percentage,


the
the


count,
total p


row


percentage .


Column h


"SD"


represent


sagree


Only


sagree,


3.1% of


agreed with


readings


shown as


strongly


agree,


and strongly


presidents


this


assumption.


" "A,


I" "N,


agree,


disagree,


4.3%


I,"D


neither


" and


agree


nor


respectively


the directors dis-


Those who could


neither


agree nor


presidents


disagree


consisted of


and directors,


13.0%


respectively


also


observable


that not one


respondent


checked


"strongly


disagree"


category.


" SA










Results


presented


in Table


indicate


that both


groups


of administrators


agreed with


the assumption


relating


goals


variable.


The extent of


agreement was


72.9%


institutional


presidents


consortium


directors.


Less


than


these


administrators


were not


in agreement


with


theorists.


presidents


who


responded


this manner


represented


this group as


compared


8.7%


the directors.


Tabi


Goals


Total


Presidents


84.9


75.0


18.4


7


Directors


15.1


47.8
14.5


COLUMN
TOTAL


21.1


50.0


23.0


Note:


Chi-square


2.28;


Numbers


percentage,


in each
column o


cell


erce


represent


ntage,


count,


total


row


percentage.


column headings


shown as


" "N,


" and


" SA r


it II A.


rt oD,


,










Consistent with


2.28


these


level


findings was


of significance.


a chi-square


This


value


value of


chi-square


level.


was


Therefore,


not statistically


significant at


no significant difference


existed be-


tween


the responses


from


these


two


groups


administrators.


Table


"informational


reports


source"


results


variable.


responses


A chi-square computed


(not


significant at


level)


indicated


that


Table


Informational


Source


Total


Presidents


34.9


84.9


Directors


85.0
11.2


3
13.0


21.7
10.0


34.8


15.1


COLUMN
TOTAL


13.2


30.3


100.0


Note:


Chi-square


.35;


aNumbers
percentage,


in each
column D


cell


represent


percentage,


the
the


count
total


row


percentage.


bColumn headincas


shown as


ft "A


ft "IN,


II


" and


" SA


,


,










no significant difference existed between


responses


institutional


administrators


and


consortium administrators.


Further


analysis


revealed


that neither


group of


adminis-


trators


More


agreed with


specifically,


notion


48.1%


advanced by


institutional


theory.


presidents


34.8%


the consortium directors


were


in agreement


with


"informational


source"


assumption.


degree


disparity was


22.5%


and


30.4%


presidents


directors,


respectively.


An even larger percentage of


these


adminis tra tors


responded


this


variable


checking


"neither


agree


nor


disagree"


category.


This


percentage was


29.5%


for the


presidential


group


34.8%


the directors.


A chi-square


value


1.97


compute d


from


the data


Table


indicated


that


there


was


no statistically


signifi-


cant difference


level between


responses


two


administrative


groups.


This


table


also


illustrates


that 58


presidents


47.8%


consortium


administrators were


in agreement with


assumption


relating


channeling


information within


the organi-


zation.


Although


no one


checked


"strongly


disagree"


category


11.6%


presidents


.7% of


con-


sortium directors


were


in agreement with


theoreti-


cians.


A significantly


large


percentage


respondents










Table
Information


7
Channeling


bRow
SA A N D SD Total

29 47 38 15 0 129
Presidents 22.5 36.4 29.5 11.6 0.0 84.9
85.3 83.7 79.2 88.2 0.0
19.1 30.9 25.0 9.9 0.0


5 6 10 2 0 23
Directors 21.7 26.1 43.5 8.7 0.0 15.1
14.7 11.3 20.8 11.8 0.0
3.3 3.9 6.6 1.3 0.0

COLUMN 34 53 48 17 0 152
TOTAL 22.4 34.9 31.6 11.2 0.0 100.0


Note:


Chi-square


1.97


3 df.


aN umbeh


percentage,


in each


column


cell


represent


percentage,


and


the count


total


, row


percentage.


Column headin


shown as


I, 1(A


" "N,


I, cD


" and


"SD"


represent:


disagree


, disagree


strongly
e, and


y agree,
strongly


agree


disagree,


neither


respe


agree


nor


actively


Analysis


independent variables


was


conducted


determine


the extent


to which


consortia


were distributed


across


different categories


these


variables.


Frequency


distributions


were


utilized


this


purpose.


Table


reports


results


variable.


These


results


indicate


that


26.7% of


consortia surveyed


" SA










years


constituted


16.7%.


same percentage,


16 .7%,


represented


those


that were


years


and older.


From


these


results


appears


that most of


these


consortia have been


in existence


less


than


years.


Table


Distribution of
Represented


the Age of
Consortiaa


0-5 6-10 11-15 16+ Total


8 12 5 5 30
(26.7) (40.0) (16.7) (16.7) 100


in parentheses


indicate


percentages.


The results


recorded


in Table


indicate


that


majority


consortia


consist of


less


than


10 institu-


tions.


More


members


specifically


less


category,


, 40.0%


while


were


26.7%


institutional


were


member


category.


The other


categories,


those consortia


that


consisted of


15 members


and those


that


con-


sisted


or more,


were


both


represented by


.7% of


consortia.


Three


cate


gories


service


variable


are


reported


in Table 10.


first category


consists


f consortia


a 1J umb E? r S











Table


Distribution


Size


the Membership


the Consortiaa


0-5 6-10 11-15 16+ Total


12 8 5 5 30
(40.0) (26.7) (16.7) (16.7) 100


aNumbers in parentheses indicate percentages.






Table 10
Distribution of the Number of Services Provided
by the Represented Consortiaa


0-10 11-20 21+ Total


7 10 13 30
(23.3) (33.3) (43.3) 100


a Nmb


Secondly,


different


in parentheses


indicate


consortia


services


percentages.


this


their members.


study provided 11


Thirteen,


3.3%


, of

A mor


these


consortia


equitable


provided more


distribution of


than


services.


consortia


across


categories


provided


Table


This


table


shows


4-k~n4- az~nl' r 4hn a anlnr n 4nr eat rsi i4 f


t h 3 t" d 3 ~11


tn 71. Al t r


nnn C 7 ; nP


AWn,


nr r










either


do not significantly


differ


from each


other


on any


variables


those


who differed


on as


many


variables.


This


category


contains


33.3%


consortia.


Nine


, or 30.0%,


consortia had members


that differed


three


comprises


four variables.


.7% of


third


sample


category


consists of


in Table


consortia


containing


institutional members


who differed on


five


more


variables.


Table


Homogeneity/Heterogeneity D
Consortium Membe


distribution of
rshipab


0-2 3-4 5+ Total

10 9 11 30
(33.3) (30.0) (36.7) 100


aNumbers


in parentheses


indicate


percentages.


b
Numbers
differences


above
among


eac
the


h


column represent


institutional


number


members


A Pearson


Product Moment Correlation was


computed


determine


if relationships


existed between


variables


under


study


For


purpose of


this


comparison,


significant


level


was


utilized.


Results


of the correlation










these


relationships


existed


among


dependent


variables,


whereas


SIX


were


found


among


independent


variables.


However,


only


incidences


of significant


relationship


between


these


groups


variables


were


revealed


these


results.


Table


Correlation


Matri


Variables


-H *-


ctD

SO4-


Resource

Scheduling

Goals


Information

Information


Source


Channeling


Age

Size


Service

Homogeneity/Heterogeneity


indicates


the existence


of a significant


relationship.


alus
Plus










In response


an open-ended question,


consortium


directors


cited


several


factors


as major


causes


conflict


the consortium.


These


factors,


which are


pre-


sented


reported


in descending


to be


order


institutional


of frequency mentioned,


autonomy


were


turfism;


philosophy,


goals


and objectives


problems;


financial


con-


cerns relating

anxiety; and 1


to dues


and benefits;


institutional


competition;


commitment


faculty


to cooperate.


Another


open-ended


question


concerned ways


in which


conflict affected


the effectiveness


consortium.


consortium directors'

frequency mentioned,


responses,

reported cc


in descending


)nflict as


order


factor which:


limits


cooperation;


limits


goal


achievement,


decreases


faculty


staff


commitment;


efficiency.


forces


res


search behavior;


pondent indicated


increases


that membership


polarization


was


also


end result of


conflict


in his


consortium.


Those


factors


which have been most helpful


in enabling


consortium directors


to manage


conflict were


reported


in descending


order


frequency


as:


leadership


experi-


ence


and expertise of


staff;


institutional


commitment;


faculty


involvement;


trustee


public


support and


expec-


station;


size


geographical


distance.


Additional










Open-ended


questions


were


not developed


presidents


institutional members.


Therefore,


attempt was


made


to ascertain


their


opinion


relative


these


areas


concern.


Summary


To answer


five


theoretical


questions,


data


were


subjected


to frequency


percentage


analyses.


Chi-


square


statistics


were


also


applied


these


dependent


variables


to determine


whether


statistically


significant


differences


existed between


responses


referent


groups.


independent or personal


data


variables


were


subjected


to frequency


percentage


examination.


Correla-


tional


analysis


was


utilized


to determine


interrelation-


ships


existed between


variables.


Analyses were


five


theoretical


dependent


and independent


also done within each


assumptions,


group.


no significant


differences


were


found


to exist between


views


held by the


directors


presidents with


regard


these


assump-


tions.


resource,


scheduling


goals


assumptions were


supported by


these


data.


However,


informational


source


information


channeling


assumptions


were


not supported.










incidences


of interrelationship


were


found


between


dependent


independent


variable


es.


A discussion


findings


reported


in Chapter


will


presented in


Chapter


Implications


, conclusions


recommendations


regarding


aforementioned


findings


will


presented.

















CHAPTER V


DISCUSSION,


CONCLUSIONS,


IMPLICATIONS,


AND


RECOMMENDATIONS


Discussion


This


study was


designed


to describe


interorganizational


conflict


in voluntary


interinstitutional


consortia by


studying perceptions


of consortium directors


and presidents


consorting


propositions


institutions


describing


toward March and


organizational


Simon's


conflict in


traditional


organization.


Moreover,


purpose


this


study was


test


extent


to which conflict


theory


developed


for traditional


organizations


applicable


interinstitutional


consortia.


Included


this


investiga-


tion was


an examination of


relationship between


theory


and a


number


of variables


associated


with


consortia.


Thirty voluntary


interinstitutional


consortia


were


randomly


selected


from


throughout


United


States.


These


consortia


comprised a


administrators.


sample

Thirty


population which


these


consisted


administrators were


-.n v1 A


I ~~r -


I -^


*










Eighty


-Six


percent


returned


questionnaires were


used


study.


returns


utilized


study were


omitted be


dents,


cause of


several


incomplete


factors:


returns,


(a)

(c)


improper


too


respon-


limited


experience


possessed by


respondents.


To protect against


improper


respondents,


the design of


instrument was


such


that


this writer


could


readily


discern


whether


or not


each opinionnaire had


been


completed


the respondent


to whom it was


forwarded


or whether


it was


completed by


a subordinate


who


had no consortium experience


and/or


no decis


ion-making


authority within


the organizational


hierarchy


opinionnaire

Several


the consortium.


were designed

reasons were


The


for

given


first


this


two questions


purpose.


for not responding


opinionnaires:


institutional


president


was


vacationing


traveling


abroad,


too much


time


was


needed


to complete


instrument,


staff


members


were


employed,


institution had


participated


consortium only


to a limited


of consortium did not apply


degree,


or did not


lend


this


itself


type


to what


instrument sought


existed


to determine,


presidential


vacancies


offices


Several


previously mentioned


reasons


that


F i


__I i.'


mi


rr 1 'I


I I


I










conj unction


with


previously mentioned


problem of


mailed


questionnaire,


seems


that


a good


representation


was


achieved.


Review of


Theory


Propositions


on conflict advanced by March


and Simon


(1958,


122-128)


to describe


nature


of conflict


organizations


addressed


in this


study


are


follows:


The greater the mutual


dependence on a


limited


resource,


greater


felt need


joint


decision-making with


The greater


respect


interdependence


that resource.


timing


activities,


the greater


felt


need


joint


deci


sion-making with respect


less


to scheduling.


subjective operationality


organi-


national


goals,


the greater


the differentiation


individual


goals


the organization.


The greater


sources,


number of


the greater


independent


information


the differentiation


per-


ceptions within


organization.


greater the


processing,

perceptions


channeling


the greater


within


information-


the differentiation of


the organization.


- -










presidents


ship


agree


with


s dependency upon a


greater


regarding


percent of


the membership


the allocation


institutional


statement,


limited c

's desire


the greater


the member-


'onsortium resource,


joint decision-making


that resource?"


presidents


Seventy-eight


consortium


directors


agreed


with


this


question.


Agreement


with


question necessarily meant agreement with


theoretical


proposition


from which


the question was


properly


derived.


This means,


therefore,


that


theory


as set


forth


Chapter


the Review of


Theory


above


was


supported


these


findings.


It also means


that


assumption


that


.the


theory was


applicable


interorganizational


setting


was


confirmed,


the respondents


who


provided


their per-


ceptions


regarding


this


variable


were


administrators


engaged


in consortium activities.


By providing


support


theory,


these


findings,


conjunction


with


interdependencies


literature,


associated


with


further


limited


suggested


resources


that


created


internal


pressure


institutional


presidents


pro-


tect


their own


resources


more


securely.


This


necessarily


caused


pressure


or a desire


to control


allocation of


those


tional


consortium resources


resources.


that


Accordingly,


impinged


theorists


institu-


described










Pressure


from many


conflict regarding


different sources within


resources


emanated


consortium.


For


example,


some of


conflicts due


resource


sharing


re-


ported


open-ended questions were derived


amount of membership dues


the amount


assessed by


of benefit or perceptions


from:


the consortium,


unequal


benefits

different


accruing


certain members,


institutions,


philosophical


fferent needs

differences,


concerns


about


location of


particular projects,


differences


in institutional


funding,


a general


perception


that


losses will


result


from sharing.


Obviously


these


concerns


in an


interinstitutional


setting may


resolved only


through


participation


the decision-making


process


jointly with


others.


only


natural,


therefore,


know


edgeable


increasingly


desire


institutional


to participate


representatives


joint decision-making


as more of


In addition,


institution's


the evidence


resources


revealed


become


involved.


that within


some


consortia


there


a general


reluctancy on behalf


membership


to engage


in activities


that


will


affect


members'


budget or


staff


substantial


degree.


This


consistent with


the attitudes


many


presidents who


have


been


unwilling


compromise


issues,


continue


a -I -, -


,-, r,, na 4-a F r -' 4 1 1A ~ 4- rnn1 nfl, ri1n rIC L f lCnr


r


~Crl~nnC~


r


r


n .~1.


n hm n n C n F


n ~ In r n 3n ~ t n r p


nr -










need


to consort.


The apparent


failure


institutional


administrators


trust each


other,


the generally


commitment


consortium exemplified by


faculty


and


staff


should


also "be


considered


as causative


factors


that


hindered


cooperation.


Evidence


seems


indicate


that


intensity


desire


joint decision-making


depends


upon


degree


which


the organizational


resources


are


limited.


obvious


that no


problems


are


associated


with dividing


unlimited


pie.


Another


assumption was


forth by


the question:


"What


the extent


to which


consortium directors,


institutional


presidents


agree with


statement,


greater


involvement of


the membership


in joint


activities


which


require


scheduling


times


activities


occur,


the greater


the desire


joint decision-making


regarding


scheduling?"


This question


was


agreed


to by


presidents


consortium directors.


A percentage


this magnitude


in support of


this question also


provided


substantial


support


theory


from which


the question


was derived.


In addition


to confirmation


theory,


these


findings


also supported


assumption


presented by


theorists


that


theory


applies


to both


organizational


-I a I -I


-I










involved


interdependencies


associated


with


sharing


limited


personnel,


resources,

pressure r


i.e.,


'elated


equipment,

to schedule


facilities,

na arises.


and

Usually


this


pressure


internal


to each


institution,


exhibited


the consortium


setting


institutional


president.


Therefore,


pressure


upon


these


administrators


to control


their


own resources


engenders


a desire


to control


timing


activities


that encroach


upon


these resources.


This


creates


a desire


to participate


in decisions made by


other


administrators


relative


to scheduling


use of


shared resources.


Considerable


evidence


in support of


the aforementioned


conditions


be observed


consortia


that are


composed


institutions


these are


in close


types


proximity


of consortia


to each


that may


other.


engage


Typically,


in exten-


sive


interdependencies,


interdependenci


involving


resources


that are


very


basic


to each


institution.


For


example,


one


or more


faculty members may work


on more


than


one


campus,


students


from


the different


campuses may


attend


a common


class,


expensive


laboratory


equipment may


be shared


several


institutions,


utilized by


or a planetarium on one campus may


the consorting


institutions.


situations


such


these,


cooperative


scheduling


essen-


* *~~~~~~~. mn1 -.. -i-z A------------I -


..


i


I L -


I '


~ ur r.


m~ r










decision-making


regarding


scheduling


use of


these


resources.


Seventy-one


percent of


total


responses


from


presidents


directors were


of institutional


in support of


relationship between


members


the extent


consortium


the question:


to which


"What is


consortium


goals


are


achieved and


extent


to which


consortium goals


institutional members


sortium directors,


differ,


as perceived


institutional


con-


presidents?"


These


administrators,


therefore,


substantiated


theory


from


which


the question


was


derived.


They


also


provided addi-


tional

respect


support


notion advanced by


applicability


theory


theorists with

an inter-


organizational


setting.


Although


respondents


indicated


that


there


were goal-related


problems


which


were attributed


per-


ceptions

goals, t


concerning


his


how well


no means


implied


consortium achieved


that all


goal-related


problems could


opposite


be categorized


suggested by


accordingly.


responses


In fact


the open-ended ques-


tions.


Evidence


provided by


these questions


strongly


suggested


that many


problems


this


category


are


caused by


attitudes brought


the consortium by


institu-


__