The Lecturer’s Formal Appointment and Group Elite Status: A Case Study of Politeknik Tuanku Sultanah Bahiyah and Politeknik Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin.

  • Mohd Faizal Jamaludin

Abstract

This study, an extension of work by Jamaludin and Bahaudin (2017), examine and compare the structural relationship of lecturers’ network in the institution of Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) in Malaysia. This study is using social network analysis (SNA) techniques at the lecturer’s level.  Furthermore, this study also analyses whether TVET institution’s additional task appointment practice focuses on the creation of valuable network size and pattern. By using UCINET and NetDraw software, this study shows that the lecturers in the networks are moderately connected. Thus, it suggests that there are a small group of lecturers that are well connected and well positioned. These positions enable their potential to exercise power and control of influence over the other lecturers within the network. Preliminarily, all networks’ centrality indicated a positive and significant association among others. Except for lecturers in Politeknik Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin.  Further analysis results identified a group of most well-connected and well-positioned TVET institutions lecturer in the Commerce Department, both in Politeknik Tuanku Sultanah Bahiyah and Politeknik Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin. The results derived suggested that lecturers with sufficient access to critical resources and information are perceived to be highly valuable to others. However, to certain extent, the closer each lecturers might weaken the network positive effects.  Therefore, this study propose that there are perception for others to maintain with these well-connected and well-positioned lecturers for the best interests.

 

KEYWORDS: Social network, lecturer, elite.

References

Abd. Hamid, A. (2011). Network Governance in Government-linked Companies (GLCs) and Non-government-linked Companies (NGLCs) in Malaysia. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 9(1), 54–73. http://doi.org/10.1108/19852511111139804

Baker, W. E. (1990). Market Networks and Corporate Behavior. American Journal of Sociology, 96(3), 589–625.

Barnea, A., & Guedj, I. (2007). Director Networks and Firm Governance. Unpublished Working Paper.

Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard MA: Analytic Technologies.

Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2013). Analyzing Social Networks. London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Borgatti, S. P., & Halgin, D. S. (2011). On Network Theory. Organization Science, 22(5), 1168–1181. http://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1100.0641

Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. In J. E. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory of Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 46–58). New York: Greenword Press.

Burt, R. S. (1997). The Contingent Value of Social Capital. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 339–365.

Galaskiewicz, J., & Wasserman, S. (1993). Social Network Analysis: Concepts, Methodology, and Directions for the 1990s. Sociological Methods & Research, 22(1), 3–22. http://doi.org/10.1177/0049124193022001001

Grosser, T., Lopez-Kidwell, V., & Labianca, G. (2010). A Social Network Analysis of Positive and Negative Gossip in Organizational Life. Group and Organization Management, (June), 1–36.

Jamaludin, M. F., & Bahaudin, M. F. (2017). The Academicians ’ Elite Formal Group Networks Creation in Technical & Vocational Education Institution ( TVEI ): A Case Study of Politeknik Tuanku Sultanah Bahiyah. Advanced Journal of Technical and Vocational Education, 1(3), 29–35. http://doi.org/10.26666/rmp.ajtve.2017.3.7

Khanna, T., & Yafeh, Y. (2007). Business Groups in Emerging Markets : Paragons or Parasites ? Journal of Economic Literature, XLV(June), 331–372.

Larcker, D. F., So, E. C., & Wang, C. C. Y. (2013). Boardroom Centrality and Firm Performance. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 55, 225–250. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2013.01.006

Nicholson, G. J., Alexander, M., & Kiel, G. C. (2004). Defining the Social Capital of the Board of Directors: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Australian New Zealand Academy of Management, 10(1), 54–72. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0190-9622(10)00456-1

Renneboog, L., & Zhao, Y. (2011). Us knows us in the UK: On director networks and CEO compensation. Journal of Corporate Finance, 17(4), 1132–1157. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2011.04.011

Schultz-Jones, B. (2009). Examining Information Behavior Through Social Networks: An Interdisciplinary Review. Journal of Documentation, 65(4), 592–631. http://doi.org/10.1108/00220410910970276

Scott, J. (1988). Social Network Analysis. Sociology, 22(1), 109–127. http://doi.org/10.1177/0038038588022001007

Simmel, G. (1971). The Stranger. In D. N. Levine (Ed.), On Individuality and Social Froms: Selected Writings (pp. 143–149). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Streeter, C. L., & Gillespie, D. F. (1993). Social Network Analysis. Journal of Social Service Research, 16(1–2), 210–222.

Tichy, N. M., Tushman, M. L., & Fombrun, C. (1979). Social Network Analysis for Organizations. The Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 507–519. http://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v17.i43.4793

Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. (M. Granovetter, Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Westphal, J. D., & Stern, I. (2006). The Other Pathway to the Boardroom : Interpersonal Influence Behavior as a Substitute for Elite Credentials and Majority Status in Obtaining Board Appointments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51, 169–204.

Published
2019-10-18
Section
Teaching and Learning