Enhanced_Chapter_Four_Summary_Presentation.pptx

orgaiztioal structure

1. Chapter Four Summary Organizational Structure, Performance Monitoring, and Academic Staff Performance in Private Chartered Universities in Western Uganda

2. Introduction This chapter presents the findings from 386 academic staff in Western Uganda. It analyzes organizational structure, performance monitoring, and academic staff performance. Mixed-methods approach: SPSS (quantitative), NVivo (qualitative).

3. Response Rate Target: 410 academic staff Actual responses: 386 (questionnaire and interviews) High response rate supports generalizability.

4. Demographic Characteristics - Gender: 62.2% Male, 37.8% Female - Age: Majority between 30-40 years - Education: 59.8% Master’s, 24.4% PhDs - Experience: Balanced across various experience levels

5. Organizational Structures Key Aspects: - Hierarchy and Chain of Command - Departmentalization - Centralization and Decentralization - Formalization Top structure: Centralization & Decentralization (Mean: 4.00)

6. Hierarchy and Chain of Command Clear structure and well-defined roles High agreement on communication effectiveness Grand Mean: 3.93

7. Departmentalization Defined departments, objectives, and autonomy Encouraged interdepartmental collaboration Grand Mean: 3.85

8. Centralization & Decentralization Top-level decision making with departmental autonomy Effective communication across levels Grand Mean: 4.00

9. Formalization Documented policies and consistency in processes Regular policy reviews Grand Mean: 3.89

10. Types of Performance Monitoring - Evaluation Methods (e.g., peer review, student evaluations) - Monitoring Frequency - Feedback and Reporting - Use of Technology

11. Staff Perceptions on Monitoring Positive views on relevance, fairness, and improvement value of monitoring. Grand Mean: 3.92

12. Performance Monitoring & Staff Performance Monitoring enhances engagement, mentoring, and support to students. Grand Mean: 3.95

13. Academic Staff Performance - Teaching Effectiveness: Mean 4.05 - Research & Publications: Mean 3.93 - Mentoring & Support: Mean 3.97 - Professional Development: Mean 4.11

14. Correlation Analysis Organizational Structure & Monitoring: r = 0.243 Monitoring & Staff Performance: r = 0.399 Structure & Performance: r = 0.247

15. Regression Results Model R² = 0.141 Organizational Structure and Performance Monitoring explain 14.1% of variance in academic staff performance.

16. Demographics: Gender Distribution

17. Performance Monitoring Frequency

18. Summary and Recommendations - Organizational structure and performance monitoring significantly impact academic staff performance. - Centralization and decentralization ranked highest among structural types. - Continuous professional development is essential. - Recommend improved mentorship, clearer feedback systems, and enhanced tech integration.

19. Methodology - Mixed-methods approach - Quantitative data analyzed with SPSS (Version 25) - Qualitative themes analyzed using NVivo (Version 15) - Total respondents: 386 academic staff - 10 interviews conducted with faculty deans