A mixed method study of organizational culture dimensions of community college faculty library use and perceptions

Because past research has shown faculty as the driving force affecting student academic library use, librarians have tried for decades to engage classroom faculty in library activities. Nevertheless, a low rate of library use by faculty on behalf of their students persists. This study investigated the organizational culture dimensions affecting library faculty demand at a community college. The study employed a sequential quantitative-qualitative research design. A random sample of full-time faculty at a large urban community college responded to a 46-item survey. The survey data showed strong espoused support (84%) for the use of library-based materials but a much lower incidence of putting this construct into practice (46%). Interviews were conducted with 11 full-time faculty from two academic groups, English-Humanities and Engineering-Math-Science. These groups were selected because the survey data resulted in statistically significant differences between the groups pertaining to several key variables. These variables concerned the professors' perceptions of the importance of library research in their discipline, the amount of time spent on the course textbook during a term, the frequency of conversations about the library in the academic department, and the professors' ratings of the librarians' skill in instruction related to the academic discipline. All interviewees described the student culture as the predominant organizational culture at Major College. Although most interview subjects held to high information literacy standards in their courses, others were less convinced these could be realistically practiced, based on a perception of students' poor academic skills, lack of time for students to complete assignments due to their commuter and family responsibilities, and the need to focus on textbook content. Recommended future research would involve investigation of methods to bridge the gap between high espoused value toward information literacy and implementation of information-literate coursework.

A quantitative approach to the organizational design problem

The span of control is the most discussed single concept in classical and modern management theory. In specifying conditions for organizational effectiveness, the span of control has generally been regarded as a critical factor. Existing research work has focused mainly on qualitative methods to analyze this concept, for example heuristic rules based on experiences and/or intuition. This research takes a quantitative approach to this problem and formulates it as a binary integer model, which is used as a tool to study the organizational design issue. This model considers a range of requirements affecting management and supervision of a given set of jobs in a company. These decision variables include allocation of jobs to workers, considering complexity and compatibility of each job with respect to workers, and the requirement of management for planning, execution, training, and control activities in a hierarchical organization. The objective of the model is minimal operations cost, which is the sum of supervision costs at each level of the hierarchy, and the costs of workers assigned to jobs. The model is intended for application in the make-to-order industries as a design tool. It could also be applied to make-to-stock companies as an evaluation tool, to assess the optimality of their current organizational structure. Extensive experiments were conducted to validate the model, to study its behavior, and to evaluate the impact of changing parameters with practical problems. This research proposes a meta-heuristic approach to solving large-size problems, based on the concept of greedy algorithms and the Meta-RaPS algorithm. The proposed heuristic was evaluated with two measures of performance: solution quality and computational speed. The quality is assessed by comparing the obtained objective function value to the one achieved by the optimal solution. The computational efficiency is assessed by comparing the computer time used by the proposed heuristic to the time taken by a commercial software system. Test results show the proposed heuristic procedure generates good solutions in a time-efficient manner.

Workplace Discrimination Climate and Team Effectiveness: The Mediating Role of Collective Value Congruence, Team Cohesion, and Collective Affective Commitment

This study explored the relationship between workplace discrimination climate on team effectiveness through three serial mediators: collective value congruence, team cohesion, and collective affective commitment. As more individuals of marginalized groups diversify the workforce and as more organizations move toward team-based work (Cannon-Bowers & Bowers, 2010), it is imperative to understand how employees perceive their organization’s discriminatory climate as well as its effect on teams. An archival dataset consisting of 6,824 respondents was used, resulting in 332 work teams with five or more members in each. The data were collected as part of an employee climate survey administered in 2011 throughout the United States’ Department of Defense. The results revealed that the indirect effect through M1 (collective value congruence) and M2 (team cohesion) best accounted for the relationship between workplace discrimination climate (X) and team effectiveness (Y). Meaning, on average, teams that reported a greater climate for workplace discrimination also reported less collective value congruence with their organization (a1 = -1.07, p < .001). With less shared perceptions of value congruence, there is less team cohesion (d21 = .45, p < .001), and with less team cohesion there is less team effectiveness (b2 = .57, p < .001). In addition, because of theoretical overlap, this study makes the case for studying workplace discrimination under the broader construct of workplace aggression within the I/O psychology literature. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis found that workplace discrimination based on five types of marginalized groups: race/ethnicity, gender, religion, age, and disability was best explained by a three-factor model, including: career obstruction based on age and disability bias (CO), verbal aggression based on multiple types of bias (VA), and differential treatment based on racial/ethnic bias (DT). There was initial support to claim that workplace discrimination items covary not only based on type, but also based on form (i.e., nonviolent aggressive behaviors). Therefore, the form of workplace discrimination is just as important as the type when studying climate perceptions and team-level effects. Theoretical and organizational implications are also discussed.