![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
This article starts from the recognition that senior staff contribute to the operation of further education college governance through working time, professional insight and public performance. The theoretical underpinning for the article draws upon social identity theory, governance accountability and the psychological contract for senior staff as employees of the governing body. The article reports the findings from a research study seeking to gain a greater understanding of the ways in which senior staff contribute to further education college governance and their perceptions of their role and performance in relation to college governance. 102 senior staff responded to a questionnaire, and three case examples of further education colleges in England were involved in this study. The article concludes with three recommendations to college governing bodies as to how they might improve senior staff contributions to effective governing of colleges.
References
|
Association of Colleges (2011) Foundation Code of F.E. Governance. London: AoC. Google Scholar | |
|
Association of Colleges (2013) www.aoc.co.uk. Google Scholar | |
|
BIS (2011) New Challenges, New Chances: Next Steps in Implementing the Further Education Reform Programme London. London: Department for Business, Innovation & Skills. Google Scholar | |
|
Code Steering Group (2010) Good Governance: A Code for the Voluntary and Community Sector. London: ACEVO and partners. Google Scholar | |
|
Coffee, J (2006) Gatekeepers: The Professions and Corporate Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Conway, N, Briner, R (2004) Role of the psychological contract. Presentation to the 2004 CIPD Annual Psychology at Work Conference. Google Scholar | |
|
Cowton, C (2008) Governing the corporate citizen: Reflections on the role of professionals. In: Luetge, C, Conill, J, Schoenwaelder-Kuntze, T (eds) Corporate Citizenship, Contractarianism and Ethical Theory: On Philosophical Foundations of Business Ethics. Aldershot: Ashgate. Google Scholar | |
|
Haslam, SA, Reicher, S, Platow, M (2011) The New Psychology of Leadership. Hove: Psychology Press (Taylor & Francis). Google Scholar | |
|
Hill, R (2007) The role and performance of college governing bodies in relation to the employment of principals of further education colleges. In: Collinson, D (ed.) Researching in the Learning and Skills Sector: By the Sector, On the Sector, For the Sector. Lancaster: Centre for Excellence in Leadership. Google Scholar | |
|
Lorsch, J (1995) Empowering the Board. Harvard Business Review 73(1): 107–117. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
Lorsch, JW, MacIver, E (1989) Pawns or potentates: The reality of America's corporate boards. Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration, Boston, MA. Google Scholar | |
|
Mace, ML (1971) Directors: Myth and reality. Harvard University Graduate School of Business Administration, Boston, MA. Google Scholar | |
|
Matthews, J, Snell, M, Chapman, R (2011) Case Studies in Governance Arrangements in the Further Education Sector. Coventry: LSIS. Google Scholar | |
|
Ofsted (March 2013) Local Accountability and Autonomy in Colleges. London: Ofsted. Google Scholar | |
|
Roberts, J, McNulty, T, Stiles, P (2005) Beyond agency conceptions of the work of the non-executive director: Creating accountability in the boardroom. British Journal of Management 16: 5–26. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Rousseau, D (1995) Psychological Contracts in Organizations: Understanding Written and Unwritten Agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Google Scholar | |
|
van der Walt, N, Ingley, C (2000) Evaluating board effectiveness: The changing context of strategic governance. Journal of Change Management 1(4): 313–331. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Western, S (2008) Leadership: A Critical Text. London: SAGE. Google Scholar | Crossref |
