Anais
Resumo do trabalho
Estudos Organizacionais · Comportamento Organizacional
Título
INFLUENCE OF ROLE CONFLICTS AND SOCIAL RELATIONS ON THE AUTONOMY OF THE PROFESSOR-MANAGER
Palavras-chave
Professor-manager
Autonomy
Informal networks
Autores
-
Wesley Marcos de AlmeidaPONTIFÍCIA UNIVERSIDADE CATÓLICA DO PARANÁ (PUCPR)
-
Sirley Terezinha FilipakPONTIFÍCIA UNIVERSIDADE CATÓLICA DO PARANÁ (PUCPR)
Resumo
Introdução
Higher education faces transformations and pressures for efficiency. Professor-managers accumulate teaching and administrative roles, generating conflicts. This study analyzes the influence of role conflicts and social relations on the autonomy of these professionals in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), seeking to understand dynamics that affect their management and effectiveness.
Problema de Pesquisa e Objetivo
This study investigates how power and authority relations in HEIs influence the autonomy of the professor-manager. The objective is to evaluate the impact of role conflicts and formal/informal relations on the autonomy of these professionals, contributing to strategies that promote greater effectiveness in their functions.
Fundamentação Teórica
Covers organizational management models, managerial roles (Mintzberg: informational, interpersonal, decisional), autonomy, and role conflict. Discusses power relations and social networks (formal and informal), highlighting how they influence the autonomy of the professor-manager. References include Mintzberg, Lück, Andrade, Bourdieu, Charlot, Peroni, Marteleto, and Borgatti.
Metodologia
Mixed, exploratory, and interpretive study, with critical and dialogical hermeneutics. The sample consisted of 22 HEIs in Curitiba-PR and 793 professor-managers. Data collection was carried out via documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews. Data analysis included descriptive techniques, content analysis (Bardin, 2011), and Social Network Analysis (SNA) (Freeman, 1996), with methodological triangulation for in-depth understanding.
Análise dos Resultados
The autonomy of the professor-manager is predominantly partial (69.8%), with no significant difference between public/private HEIs. Limiting factors include collegiate decisions, bureaucracy, and centralization, with the latter two being more critical in public HEIs. Accountability is common (91.3%), with a prevalence of reporting to direct superiors in private institutions and to peers in public ones. Informal networks (experience, affinity) are more activated than formal ones for support, indicating the prevalence of informal power.
Conclusão
The autonomy of the professor-manager is limited by bureaucratic and centralizing structures, and their authority is diminished by peers and collegiate bodies. There is a valorization of operational tasks to the detriment of strategic actions. The study highlights methodological triangulation as a contribution, revealing the coexistence of centralizing structures and informal networks. Differences between public and private HEIs regarding collegiate bodies and bureaucracy are evident.
Contribuição / Impacto
The study contributes by analyzing the autonomy of the professor-manager, revealing the tension between democratic management and managerial practices. Methodological triangulation (content analysis and SNA) maps organizational dynamics and power relations, highlighting the prevalence of informal networks. It offers insights for managers and educational policymakers to rethink university management structures and processes, promoting greater autonomy and effectiveness.
Referências Bibliográficas
AMARAL, G. T. P. (2018); ANDRADE, A. R. (2002); BARDIN, L. (2011); BORGATTI, S. P. et al. (2013); BOURDIEU, P. (2007); BRASIL (1996); CERVIGICELE, G. M.; SOUZA, R. (2013); CHARLOT, B. (2007); FREEMAN, L. C. (1996); GADAMER, H. G. (2007); LÜCK, H. (2011); MARTELETO, R. M. (2010); MEYER JR, V. et al. (2009); MINTZBERG, H. (1983, 1995, 2010); PERONI, V. M. V. (2012); RICOEUR, P. (2008); TURÍBIO, E. V.; SANTOS, E. H. (2017).