Collective bargaining and faculty unionization: An administrative perspective

The purpose of this qualitative case study was to gain insight into the perspectives of experienced higher education administrators regarding faculty unionization, the collective bargaining process, and the interpersonal relationships between higher education faculty members and administrators. ^ The primary method of data collection was semi-structured face to face interviews with nine administrators from two community colleges and two universities in the south Florida area. All of the study participants worked with unionized faculty members and had direct experience participating in bargaining negotiations. ^ Upon the completion of each interview, the researcher listened to the taped audio recording of the interview several times and then transcribed all of the information from the audiotape into a Word file. Data collection and analysis for each participant were performed concurrently. Using a modified concept mapping approach, the research questions were written on large yellow sticky notes and placed in the middle of a wall in the researcher’s home with nine descriptive categorical themes written on smaller sticky notes placed around the study questions. The highlighted quotes and key phrases were cut from each transcript and placed under each of the descriptive categories. Over the course of a few months repeatedly reviewing the research questions that guided this study, the theory of symbolic interactionism, and relevant literature the categorical descriptive themes were refined and condensed into five descriptive themes. ^ Study findings indicated that the administrators: (a) must have a clear understanding of what it is that the faculty does to be an effective representative at the bargaining table, (b) experienced role ambiguity and role strain related to a lack of understanding as to their role at the bargaining table and a lack of organizational support, (c) were not offered any type of training in preparation for bargaining, (d) perceived a definite “us versus them” mentality between faculty and administration, and (e) saw faculty collective bargaining at public institutions of higher education in Florida as ineffectual. ^

Appraising Work Group Performance: New Productivity Opportunities in Hospitality Management

In - Appraising Work Group Performance: New Productivity Opportunities in Hospitality Management – a discussion by Mark R. Edwards, Associate Professor, College of Engineering, Arizona State University and Leslie Edwards Cummings, Assistant Professor, College of Hotel Administration University of Nevada, Las Vegas; the authors initially provide: “Employee group performance variation accounts for a significant portion of the degree of productivity in the hotel, motel, and food service sectors of the hospitality industry. The authors discuss TEAMSG, a microcomputer based approach to appraising and interpreting group performance. TEAMSG appraisal allows an organization to profile and to evaluate groups, facilitating the targeting of training and development decisions and interventions, as well as the more equitable distribution of organizational rewards.” “The caliber of employee group performance is a major determinant in an organization's productivity and success within the hotel and food service industries,” Edwards and Cummings say. “Gaining accurate information about the quality of performance of such groups as organizational divisions, individual functional departments, or work groups can be as enlightening...” the authors further reveal. This perspective is especially important not only for strategic human resources planning purposes, but also for diagnosing development needs and for differentially distributing organizational rewards.” The authors will have you know, employee requirements in an unpredictable environment, which is what the hospitality industry largely is, are difficult to quantify. In an effort to measure elements of performance Edwards and Cummings look to TEAMSG, which is an acronym for Team Evaluation and Management System for Groups. They develop the concept. In discussing background for employees, Edwards and Cummings point-out that employees - at the individual level - must often possess and exercise varied skills. In group circumstances employees often work at locations outside of, or move from corporate unit-to-unit, as in the case of a project team. Being able to transcend individual-to-group mentality is imperative. “A solution which addresses the frustration and lack of motivation on the part of the employee is to coach, develop, appraise, and reward employees on the basis of group achievement,” say the authors. “An appraisal, effectively developed and interpreted, has at least three functions,” Edwards and Cummings suggest, and go on to define them. The authors do place a great emphasis on rewards and interventions to bolster the assertion set forth in their thesis statement. Edwards and Cummings warn that individual agendas can threaten, erode, and undermine group performance; there is no - I - in TEAM.

Managing Quality in the Hospitality Industry:

In - Managing Quality In the Hospitality Industry – an observation by W. Gerald Glover, Associate Professor, Hospitality Management Program, Appalachian State University, initially Glover establishes: “Quality is a primary concern in the hospitality industry. The author sees problems in the nature of the way businesses are managed and discusses approaches to ensuring quality in corporate cultures.” As the title suggests, the author wants to point out certain discrepancies in hospitality quality control, as well as enlighten you as to how to address some of these concerns. “A discussion of quality presents some interesting dilemmas. Quality is something that almost everyone wants,” Assistant Professor Glover notes. “Service businesses will never admit that they don't provide it to their customers, and few people actually understand what it takes to make it happen,” he further maintains. Glover wants you to know that in a dynamic industry such as hospitality, quality is the common denominator. Whether it be hotel, restaurant, airline, et al., quality is the raison d’être of the industry. “Quality involves the consistent delivery of a product or service according to the expected standards,” Glover provides. Many, if not all quality deficiencies can be traced back to management, Glover declares. He bullet points some of the operational and guest service problems managers’ face on a daily basis. One important point of note is the measuring and managing of quality. “Standards management is another critical area in people and product management that is seldom effective in corporations,” says Glover. “Typically, this area involves performance documentation, performance evaluation and appraisal, coaching, discipline, and team-building.” “To be effective at managing standards, an organization must establish communication in realms where it is currently non-existent or ineffective,” Glover goes on to say. “Coaching, training, and performance appraisal are methods to manage individuals who are expected to do what's expected.” He alludes to the benefit quality circles supply as well. In addressing American organizational behavior, Glover postures, “…a realization must develop that people and product management are the primary influences on generating revenues and eventually influencing the bottom line in all American organizations.” Glover introduces the concept of pro-activity. “Most recently, quality assurance and quality management have become the means used to develop and maintain proactive corporate cultures. When prevention is the focus, quality is most consistent and expectations are usually met,” he offers. Much of the article is dedicated to, “Appendix A-Table 1-Characteristics of Corporate Cultures (Reactive and Proactive. In it, Glover measures the impact of proactive management as opposed to the reactive management intrinsic to many elements of corporate culture mentality.