Introduction

In carrying out their plans and programs, top and middle-level administrators should maintain a harmonious working relationship with their subordinates since they cannot do it alone. Administrators need the help and assistance of the people around them so that organizational success may be achieved. The goals of an organization will be easily attained if there is cooperation of all the stakeholders, from the top management down to the rank and file employees. This also applies to educational institutions. In order to execute their mandate of providing quality education, schools, colleges, and universities should be a cohesive unit, from the university president, to the vice-presidents, deans, directors, faculty members, and even the non-academic personnel.

Hackmans (2002) reiterates that the degree to which the leader ensures there is compelling direction and an enabling structure wherein the leader will be viewed as effective and are behavioral markers of the leader ability. On the other hand, Bass and Riggio (2006) view that trust in leadership is one of the most essential variables in the process of influencing followers. This is where the reputation of the leader is tested. Studies have shown that reputation will import the degree of trust and accountability standards. Leaders with credible reputations will often receive some latitude on their decision-making even without personal interactions or direct observation (Hall et.al., 2004).Leader reputation, as elucidated by Treadway (2003) refers to the “perceptual ability of a leader as held by others that serves to reduce the uncertainty regarding expected future behavior of that leader.Reputation reveals information about a leader’s ability and moral aptitude.

Considering the delicate and crucial role school administrators play in managing their respective institutions, the researcher decided to delve on the present study to look into the effectiveness of the administrative personnel of the Bulacan State University.

Statement of the Problem

The general problem of the study is “How effective are the administrative personnel of the Bulacan State University in terms of performance of their duties and responsibilities?”

Specifically, it sought answers to the following questions :

1. How effective are the following University officials with reference to the performance of their duties and responsibilities as stipulated in the BulSU Administrative Manual

i. University President ;

ii. Vice President for Academic Affairs (VPAA)

iii. Vice President for Administration and Finance (VPAF) ;

iv. Vice President for Planning, Research and Extension (VPPRE) ; and

v. Vice President for External Affairs (VPEA) ?

2. How effective are the following College Deans with reference to the performance of their duties and responsibilities as stipulated in the BulSU Administrative Manual :

i. College of Science (CS) ;

ii. College of Industrial Technology (CIT)

iii. College of Nursing (CON) ;

iv. College of Business Administration (CBA)

v. College of Home Economics (CHE)

vi. College of Arts and Letters (CAL)

vii. College of Architecture and Fine Arts (CAFA) ; and

viii. College of Social Sciences and Philosophy (CSSP) ?

signification of the Study

The results of the present study is deemed beneficial to the following stakeholders, to wit

Administrators:The findings of this study maybe used by the top and middle- level administrators of the Bulacan State University to find out how effective are they in terms of carrying out their duties and responsibilities. Also, the findings of this study will enable them to make necessary improvements in terms of managing the University and their respective units or departments.

Faculty Members:This study will benefit them in the sense that they will be informed of the effectiveness of their immediate superiors, which may in turn contribute to establishing a more harmonious working relationship.

Parents and Students:Since they are the school’s number one clientele, results of this study will make them informed on the effectiveness of those who have been entrusted to manage the University.

Future Researchers:The results and findings of this study could serve as a springboard for subsequent studies on leadership, performance effectiveness, and organizational studies.

Scope and Delimitation

This study focused on the effectiveness of the administrative personnel of the Bulacan State University during the Academic Years 2012-2015.The administrators to be assessed have been in the position for the last three years. As for the measurement of the effectiveness of the administrators, the duties and responsibilities of the administrators as stipulated in the BulSU Administrative Manual were referred to.Respondents of the study were the 127 faculty members from the different colleges who were selected via purposive sampling. The respondents have been in the University from A.Y. 2012 until A.Y. 2015

Image 1

Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual paradigm used in the present study. The First Frame depicts the duties and responsibilities of the following BulSU Administrative Personnel as stipulated in the BulSU Administrative Manual : University President, VPAA, VPAF, VPPRE, VPEA, and the Deans of the different colleges. The IV-DV Model was employed in the present study in order to investigate if there is a direct relationship between the aforementioned variables.

Mathodology

This study primarily made use of the descriptive method of research to determine the effectiveness of the administrative personnel of the Bulacan State University with reference to the performance of their duties and responsibilities. The researcher made use of a questionnaire adapted from the BulSU Administrative Manual stipulating the duties and responsibilities of the administrative personnel as the main data gathering tool. The said questionnaire was administered to the 127 faculty members of the various colleges of the University who were selected via purposive sampling. Respondents were asked to indicate their perception of effectiveness of their administrators using a 7-point Likert Scale:

Table 1: Scale for Measuring the Effectiveness of the BulSUAdministrative Personnel.

Range Numerical Rating Verbal Interpretation
6.50-7.00 7 Absolutely Effective
5.50-6.49 6 Effective
4.50-5.49 5 Slightly Effective
3.50-4.49 4 Neutral
2.50-3.49 3 Slightly Ineffective
1.50-2.49 2 Ineffective
1.00-1.49 1` Absolutely Ineffective

Results and Discussion

Table 2: Summary of the Effectiveness of theUniversity President and VP’s.

University Official Mean Std Verbal Interpretation
University President 5.6 0.997 Effective
VPAA 5.58 1.002 Effective
VPAF 5.43 1.673 Slightly Effective
VPPRE 5.59 0.803 Effective
VPEA 5.63 0.819 Effective
Grand Mean 5.57 1.0588 Effectivea

Table 2 presents the summary of the Effectiveness of the University President and the Vice Presidents as perceived by their constituents. It can be gleaned that the faculty members perceived their administrators as Effective with a Grand Mean of 5.57 with a standard deviation of 1.0588. This implies that when it comes to the performance of their duties and responsibilities, BulSU Administrative Officials perform relatively well.

Table 3: Summary of the Effectiveness of the College Deans.

College Mean Std Verbal Interpretation
CS 6.14 0.716 Effective
CIT 5.83 0.983 Effective
CON 5.38 1.32 Slightly Effective
CBA 5.62 1.68 Effective
CHE 6.13 1.33 Effective
CAL 5.935 0.517 Effective
CAFA 6.17 1.42 Effective
CSSP 5.87 0.75 Effective
Grand Mean 5.88 1.09 Effective

On the other hand, Table 3 illustrates the Summary of the Effectiveness of the various College Deans of the University.With a Grand Mean of 5.88 and a standard deviation of 1.09, it can be surmised that generally, the College Deans were rated as Effective.This implies that the faculty members of the different colleges within the University are satisfied with the performance of their respective Deans.

Findings

The findings of this study reveal the following:

1. The effectiveness of the Administrative Personnel of the Bulacan State University are as follows :

i. The University President was rated as “Effective”, which indicates that in terms of performance of official functions, the respondents view that there are still areas of improvement that needs to be addressed. The role of the University President is very crucial since he is at the helm of the college or university and makes the major decisions for his constituents. Not to mention that the University President supervises the different vice presidents, deans, directors, and heads of offices, who have their own temperaments and unique attributes.

As such, he has to deal also with leaders, and inevitably, in making decisions, conflicts may exist. Tanveer & Khan (2014) states that it is easy and enjoyable if the administrator is enriched with desired personal traits and management skills. The most effective academic leaders are able to manage interpersonal conflict because “diverse” work populations often do not agree on organizational goals. Another possible reason for having a “Slightly Effective” rating is lack of consultation with his constituents before making decisions for the University. This was echoed by the study made by Lehman (2017) in which the University President obtained the lowest median score in terms of consulting with the faculty.

ii. The VPAA was assessed as “Effective” by the respondents, indicating that the respondents are pleased with the way the said official is handling academic and other related matters of the University. Lehman (2017) also stated the Provost (equivalent to the VPAA) obtained a highest median score in terms of promoting a scholarly environment. The VPAA directly supervises the deans of the colleges and is tasked with the implementation of academic policies of the University. The “Effective” rating obtained by the VPAA indicates that based on the data obtained from the respondents, the said official is indeed performing well.

iii. The VPAF was rated as “Slightly Effective” by the respondents, implying that in terms of financial transactions and other related concerns, the respondents would like to see more transparency. This was echoed in the study of Alfred (2004), wherein the made a personal observation when he was vice-president of finance, planning, and management in a certain university, he turned down the offer of assistance from a faculty task force in designing the school’s institutional planning and budget system. It turned out that the system constructed was narrowly conceived. This shows the importance of being transparent especially when it comes to financial matters and issues.

iv. The VPPRE was assessed as “Effective.” This implies that when it comes to providing opportunities for research and in handling the extension programs of the University, the respondents are satisfied with the performance of the said university official. Research is also a core function of a university, alongside instruction and community engagement programs. As such, the VPPRE should craft well-knit programs corresponding to research and extension.

v. The VPEA was rated as “Effective.”This indicates that the respondents are pleased with the performance of the said official when it comes to handling the external affairs of the University.The role of the said official is also crucial. He is directly concerned with the external affairs of the University and handles the “satellite campuses.” Having a rating of “Effective” means that the respondents perceive the VPEA as adept in handling such duties and responsibilities in the university

2 The effectiveness of the College Deans are as follows

i. The Dean of the CS was rated as “Effective.” This implies that the faculty members of the College of Science are satisfied with the said university official in managing the affairs of the College.

ii. The Dean of the CIT was also rated as “Effective.” This infers that the faculty members of the College of Information Technology see their Dean as performing well in terms of fulfilling his duties and responsibilities.

iii. The Dean of the CON was assessed as “Slightly Effective”, indicating that the faculty members of the College of Nursing are somehow satisfied with the performance of their Dean. However, there are certain areas of improvement that needs to be addressed for the betterment of the college.

iv. The Dean of the CBA was rated as “Effective.” This implies that the faculty members of the College of Business Administration view their Dean as performing well when it comes to handling the everyday operations of the College.

v. The Dean of the CHE was assessed as “Effective” by the respondents, indicating that the faculty members of the College of Home Economics are pleased with the way their Dean is running their College.

vi. The Dean of the CAL was rated as “Effective.” This implies that the faculty members of the College of Arts and Letters are satisfied with the way their Dean is dealing with the concerns of the College.

vii. The Dean of the CAFA was assessed as “Effective” by the respondents. This indicates that the faculty members of the College of Architecture and Fine Arts are pleased with the performance of their Dean in terms of managing the affairs of the College.

viii. The Dean of the CSSP was rated as “Effective” by the respondents. This indicates that the faculty members of the College of Social Sciences and Philosophy are satisfied with the way their Dean is handling the operations of the College.

The combined mean reveals that in general, the respondents from the different colleges and academic units in the University perceive their Dean as performing well in managing their respective colleges. Although, there was one Dean who got a rating of Slightly Effective. This implies that the Deans of the Bulacan State University effectively manage the everyday affairs of their colleges. Deans are also critical in the success of an educational institution, particularly, a college or a university.They are the ones who directly handle faculty members and are responsible for implementing the academic policies handed down by the VPAA. Moreover, the Deans are tasked to devise curricular programs and offerings responsive to the needs of the community.

Conclusion

The primary purpose of the present study is to assess the effectiveness of the administrators of the Bulacan State University in terms of performance of their official functions as stipulated in the Administrative Manual of the University. Data revealed that generally, the respondents rated their administrators as Effective. This implies that the administrators of the University perform well insofar as their duties and responsibilities are concerned. Bakhsh, et al (2014) states that colleges and universities which are better managed produce better educational products. Ultimately, the success of an educational institution depends of the efficiency and effectiveness of its administrators.

It is also important for administrators to be provided with the results of the evaluation made by the faculty and other subordinates for them to know their strengths and weaknesses and make the necessary improvements, when needed. The findings of this study could be utilized to address the strengths and weaknesses of top and middle-level administrators for the betterment and continuous refinement of the University. Alfred (2017) notes that if faculty assessment of the performance of administrators is carried out properly, this would improve the context in which scholarship and learning take place and make the University a better place to work for those who are already in the institution and an effective marketing strategy to attract more talented people to work for the University.

Recommendation

The researcher recommends that a follow-up study be conducted in order to further validate the findings of this study. Moreover, respondents should also include the non-teaching personnel since the respondents of the present study were only limited to the faculty members.