Effects of university governance and academic identity towards faculty job stress, satisfaction, and performance in Taiwan

Abstract

For the past two decades, differentiation and competition among higher education institutions have given rise to various changes within university governance. In Taiwan, challenges brought forth by the global university rankings and combined with the deceasing number of incoming enrolees due to low birth-rates have resulted in the need for institutions to perform beyond their traditional roles and thus, created the current multi-functioning faculty. Similarly, the myriad change that is happening within higher education has also resulted in a shift of the university work environment from a relative autonomous academic practice to externally dictated performative priorities. Within such an environment, faculty are now faced with conflicting role and purpose. Hence, their academic identity is now in question. In effect, stress and burnout among faculty have now become a common issue. With these having said, the current study shall seek to understand how faculty job stress, satisfaction, and performance are affected by the changing university governance and academic identity. Using a simplified version of the Changing Academic Profession Questionnaire; a total of 457 academics (311 male and 146 female faculty) in Taiwan were surveyed. Data were encoded and analysed using ordinary least square (OLS) multiple linear regressions. Dependent variables for the models were job stress, job satisfaction, and faculty performance, while the independent variable was academic identity, classified as either dual (combination of research and teaching), research, or teaching. Teaching identity was used as a criterion variable. In addition, demographic and academic background, current work conditions, and university culture and governance (affiliation, empowerment, collegiality, and managerialism) were also included. OLS multiple regressions results show that job stress is related to the market-like academic culture, top-down management style, and dual identities of faculty. Furthermore, findings also showed that younger academics, faculty who are not professors, and either research or teaching preference only faculty have higher tendencies to get stressed. In addition, results also showed that job satisfaction is very much related to faculty affiliation, empowerment, and collegiality. In addition, findings also showed that the more top-down like the management are, the more dissatisfied are the faculty. Interestingly, results also showed that tenured faculty tends to exhibit higher dissatisfaction than their non-tenured counterparts. Lastly, outcome performance is found to be much related to time spent on research. In sum, results showed that the current academia is more suited for individuals who have dual academic identities, as compared to those who focused only on either research or teaching. These are all brought about by the current neoliberal management strategies within Taiwan universities. In addition, the top-down management style is not popular among faculty, while collegiality is also not helping with their performance. Interestingly, tenured faculty are also not satisfied with their job, indicating the increased need for compliance with neoliberal management policies are making them unhappy. Lastly, as the pressure to perform within universities increases, changes within institutional governance are but inevitable.