Microsoft Word doctoral thesis final[1]. doc

2.4.1  Theoretical perspective  
 
Universities in the UK, other countries and more recently in South Africa are faced with 
increasing demands and calls for institutional change. These calls for change involve 
restructuring of the entire system of university education from management, to 
curriculum and students. It involves: 
 
▪ ‘ 
rightsizing’ and ‘downsizing’ of personnel and academic departments;  
▪ 
adoption of business oriented management approaches;  
▪ 
introduction of new and improved programmes geared towards meeting market 
demands and  
▪ 
diversification of programme provision and student profiles. 
 
 All these changes demand effective leadership at institutional and departmental level. As 
Middlehurst (1993) puts it, “In times of change there appears to be both a heightened 
need for leadership and an expectation that those in senior positions will provide 
leadership” (p82). In other words, academic leaders  are expected to provide direction in 
these times of change and to assist their colleagues achieve individual, departmental and 
institutional goals. Intellectual and managerial  leadership become essential elements of 
effective leadership in the academe during the transformation era. Academic HoDs in 
particular find themselves having to exercise  intellectual, academic and managerial 
leadership to enable successful restructuring to occur at departmental level. Intellectual 

---

 
35
leadership, according to Middlehurst (1993), could be achieved in research, teaching and 
scholarship. In addition academic leadership would  involve influencing the direction of 
academic activities and areas of study, while managerial leadership would involve 
planning and budgeting; organising and staffing, controlling and problem-solving ( 
Middlehurst 1993). 
 
A few definitions of leadership in the academic context might be helpful at this juncture. 
According to Bryman (1992), cited in Middlehurst (1993:68), leadership “is a process of 
social influence whereby a leader steers members of a group towards a goal”.  It is also 
“the ability to convince and persuade others to act on the basis of greater knowledge or 
competence, reasoned argument and fairness” (p75). Leadership “consists of establishing 
vision and direction, building commitment through communication and negotiation about 
collective goals and change” (p83). The leadership task in an academic context includes 
“challenging existing practices, modes of thought or academic areas that no longer fit the 
direction proposed” (p84). Leadership involves translating and interpreting the ‘dual’ 
language currently in use in the changing academic environment, namely, that of   “cost-
efficiency, value-for-money, audit, competition and performance indicators” as well as 
“intellectual development, value-for-life, professionalism, collaboration and reputation 
among peers”. Leadership will “also involve taking hard decisions about those values and 
practices which should be retained and those which will need adaptation”(Middlehurst 
1993:84). Leadership is necessary for guiding and developing disciplinary and teaching 
objectives as well as being relevant for the development and implementation of research 
programmes. Leadership is involved in the interpretation of values as well as the 
representation of collective purposes and interests. As much as in other organisations it is 
also required to facilitate, stimulate and focus individual and group effort in universities 
(Middlehurst 1993:86). 
 
2.4.1.1  Leadership types – transformational and transactional leadership 
 
Transformational and transactional leadership types have been selected in this section so 
as to highlight their application in a changing academic climate, as well as their 
appropriateness in the current state of university transformation. Some writers have noted  

---

 
36
the distinction drawn by James McGregor Burns between transactional and 
transformational leadership and leaders and his coining of the terms “transformational 
and transactional” (Bass1981; Middlehurst 1993; Cronin 1993). What follows is a 
political definition of the two terms. The academic connotation will be discussed later. In 
Burns’ distinction, transactional political leaders are those who: 
 
approach followers with an eye to exchanging one thing for another; jobs for votes or 
subsidies for campaign contributions. Such transactions comprise the bulk of the 
relationships among leaders and followers, especially in groups, legislatures and