Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:I:International Journal of Educational Management:Vol11.Issue3.1997:
Financial decision making: teacher involvement and
the need for trust
Geoffrey Newcombe
Busine ss Manage r, Kambala Girls’ Sc ho o l, Ro se Bay, Australia
John M cCormick
Le c ture r, Sc ho o l o f Educ atio n Studie s, Unive rsity o f Ne w So uth Wale s, Sydne y,
Australia
Fenton Sharpe
Pro fe sso r o f Educ atio nal Administratio n, Sc ho o l o f Educ atio n Studie s, Unive rsity
o f Ne w So uth Wale s, Sydne y, Australia
Suggests that a desire on the
part of teachers to be more
involved in the corporate
affairs of the school may stem
from a lack of trust in the
decision makers and the
decision-making processes.
To assist those involved in the
management of schools,
presents a theoretical framework for research and a
fi nancial decision-making
model, based on the establishment of a management
philosophy built on trust.
Demonstrates how this model
helps to differentiate management and classroom or
technical decisional issues.
Identifi es the roles and
responsibilities of those
involved in the processes.
Outlines procedures for
effective fi nancial decision
making at the school site.
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 ,3 [ 1997] 9 4 –1 0 1
© MCB Unive rsity Pre ss
[ ISSN 0951-354X]
[ 94 ]
Introduction
Th e edu ca tion system s of m a n y cou n tr ies a r e
exper ien cin g a per iod of r a dica l r efor m . Gover n m en ts a r e a ttem ptin g to im pr ove in str u ction a l qu a lity a n d lea r n in g ou tcom es th r ou gh
th e im plem en ta tion of sch ool-ba sed m a n a gem en t (Wh ite, 1989). A dom in a n t th em e of th is
r efor m m ovem en t h a s been th e developm en t
of colle gia l a n d pa r ticipa tive decision -m a k in g
pr ocedu r es a t th e sch ool level (Weiss et a l.,
1992).
Th e focu s on tea ch er in volvem en t in decision m a k in g is n ot w ith ou t h istor ica l pr eceden t (Rice a n d Sch n eider, 1992). E du ca tion a l
r esea r ch er s h ave lon g stu died th e effects of
pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g (Con w ay, 1984;
Rice a n d Sch n eider, 1992). In 1972 Alu tto a n d
Bela sco n oted th a t m u ch of th e r esea r ch h a d
been ba sed on th e im plicit a ssu m ption th a t
tea ch er s h ave a desir e to in cr ea se th eir
a bsolu te in volvem en t in a ll for m s of decision
m a k in g a n d th a t th er e is a dir ect r ela tion sh ip
between in cr ea sed tea ch er pa r ticipa tion a n d
im pr oved edu ca tion a l ou tcom es. Su ch a r ela tion sh ip r em a in s u n con fir m ed (Im ber a n d
Du k e, 1984; Taylor a n d Levin e, 1991).
A m a jor com pon en t of sch ool-ba sed m a n a gem en t r efor m h a s been th e dele ga tion of
fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t to th e sch ool site. Th e
exten t of dele ga tion in m a n y cou n tr ies su ggests th a t edu ca tion a u th or ities believe th a t
it w ill lea d to im pr oved sch ool effectiven ess
(Kn igh t, 1993). Th e r a tion a le for r efor m
a ppea r s to be th a t fin a n cia l decision m a k in g
n ea r th e poin t of deliver y of ser vice w ill
closely r eflect th e n eeds a n d pr ior ities of th e
stu den ts a n d th e sch ool com m u n ity. Dele ga tion of fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t to th e sch ool
level h a s a n u m ber of cr itica l im plica tion s for
pr in cipa ls a n d tea ch er s if th is belief is to be
oper a tion a lized. Ca r efu l str a te gic m a n a gem en t is r equ ir ed for pr ogr a m m es, r espon sive
to sch ool n eeds, to be iden tifi ed, pr ior itized,
im plem en ted, eva lu a ted a n d r eviewed. Tr a dition a l bu dgetin g pr ocedu r es sh ou ld be su ppor ted by a com pon en t of pr ogr a m m e bu dgetin g to en su r e th a t r esou r ce expen ditu r e is
closely r ela ted to edu ca tion a l ou tcom es
(J on es, 1989). P r ogr a m m e bu dgetin g n ot on ly
costs th e r esou r ces to be pr ovided bu t iden tifies th e sch ool’s policies u n der wh ich th e
pa r ticu la r ser vices or pr ogr a m m es a r e ju stified.
Devolu tion of fi n a n cia l m a n a gem en t to th e
sch ool site r ecogn izes th e im por ta n ce of pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g in edu ca tion a l
or ga n iza tion s (Du ign a n , 1990). Th e level of
pa r ticipa tion in fin a n cia l decision m a k in g
n eeds to be exten ded to th e cla ssr oom
tea ch er ; oth er w ise sch ool site fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t cou ld be ju st a n oth er for m of cen tr a lized con tr ol, w ith th e pr in cipa l a t th e
“cen tr e”. However, in a n a ttem pt to esta blish
a h igh level of tea ch er in volvem en t in decision m a k in g a n d to pr om ote a n im a ge of selfm a n a gem en t, som e sch ools h ave esta blish ed
a dm in istr a tive str u ctu r es th a t, in effect,
distr a ct tea ch er s fr om th eir pr im a r y in str u ction a l r ole (Rober tson , 1993). Som e tea ch er s
a r e r equ ir ed to a tten d m a n y m eetin gs su ch a s
bu dget com m ittees, fin a n cia l pla n n in g
gr ou ps a n d sta ff developm en t com m ittees.
Th ey a r e en cou r a ged to be in volved in a
pleth or a of fin a n cia l issu es r a n gin g fr om
in com e gen er a tion to m a r k etin g a n d lon gter m fin a n cia l pla n n in g. Despite th is w ide
r a n ge of a ppa r en t pa r ticipa tion , in m a n y
ca ses tea ch er s fin d th a t, wh ile th ese com m ittees cr ea te a n illu sion of in volvem en t, th ey
ca n a ctu a lly im pede a n y r ea l tea ch er in flu en ce (Im ber a n d Du k e, 1984). Wh ile som e
tea ch er s a gr ee th a t, in som e ca ses, th e poten tia l ben efits of pa r ticipa tion m ay ou tweigh
th e costs of th eir in volvem en t, th ey (th e
tea ch er s) feel th a t th er e is little possibility of
th ese poten tia l ben efits bein g a ctu a lly
a ch ieved, u n less th eir level of pa r ticipa tion is
m a tch ed w ith a sim ila r level of in flu en ce over
th e fin a l decision ou tcom es (Du k e et a l., 1980).
A stu dy of devolu tion r efor m s in gover n m en t sch ools in Wester n Au str a lia su ggested
th a t th e ch a n ge to self-m a n a gem en t a n d
tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g
u sh er ed tea ch er s in to “a n ew r e gim e of
u n cer ta in ty” (Rober tson a n d Sou cek , 1991). In
th a t stu dy, tea ch er s spok e of secr ecy, politick in g a n d ba ck r oom ba r ga in in g. F in a n cia l
m a n a gem en t of sch ools w a s a n ew exper ien ce
for m ost, a n d tea ch er s dou bted th eir ow n
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
a bilities, a n d th e k n ow ledge a n d sk ills of
oth er s, in th is a r ea . Th e m a n a gem en t of
m on ey a n d th e power a n d con tr ol a ssocia ted
w ith it m ay cr ea te a n en vir on m en t in wh ich
th e de gr ee of com peten ce, in te gr ity, fa ir n ess
a n d open n ess of people a n d pr ocess a r e
in evita bly scr u tin ized.
It is th e exper ien ce of th e fir st a u th or in
pr esen tin g th e Ma ster ’s cou r se, “F in a n cia l
issu es in edu ca tion ”, a t th e Un iver sity of N ew
Sou th Wa les th a t tea ch er s often h ave a n
in h er en t dislik e of fin a n cia l m a tter s. Th is
dislik e m ay stem fr om a la ck of sk ills in th e
a r ea , fr om a su spicion th a t tea ch er em power m en t in fin a n cia l decision m a k in g is m er ely a
eu ph em ism for bu dgeta r y cu tba ck s, fr om a
con viction th a t su ch bu sin ess m a tter s
in tr u de in to tea ch er s’ pr ofession a l tim e, or
fr om a n expecta tion th a t tea ch er s w ill n ever
be told th e “fu ll stor y” con cer n in g th e
sch ool’s fin a n cia l situ a tion , a m on g oth er
possibilities.
In cir cu m sta n ces wh er e pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g is ba sed on fu ll disclosu r e of
in for m a tion , a n a bsen ce of per ceived bia s in
th e decision -m a k in g pr ocess a n d effective
im plem en ta tion of th e decision s r esu ltin g
fr om th e colla bor a tive pr ocess, r esea r ch h a s
sh ow n th a t in cr ea sed tr u st in th e sch ool’s
a dm in istr a tion often r esu lts (Con ley et a l.,
1988). However, in ca ses wh er e m isr epr esen ta tion of in for m a tion is u sed to m a n ipu la te
decision s (Ra sm u ssen a n d Roth stein , 1990) or
th er e is a n u n der lyin g a u th or ita r ia n
a ppr oa ch by pr in cipa ls despite a policy wh ich
pr ofesses dem ocr a tic in volvem en t of tea ch er s
(Br ow n , 1990; Kir by, 1992), r esen tm en t, a n ger
a n d a tota l la ck of con fiden ce in th e a dm in istr a tion often develop (Du k e et a l., 1980).
An y m isr epr esen ta tion , cir cu m ven tion or
fa ilu r e to disclose fi n a n cia l in for m a tion
pla ces tea ch er s in th e fr u str a tin g position of
bein g involved in th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocess bu t w ith vir tu a lly n o r ea l in flu en ce
over decision ou tcom es.
Som e stu dies (Du k e, 1978; Lor tie, 1975) su ggested th a t tea ch er s h ave little desir e to be
involved in decision m a k in g u n less it r ela tes
to cla ssr oom pr a ctice. In fa ct, Rober tson
fou n d th a t tea ch er s in volved in th e m a n a ger ia l a n d cor por a te life of th e sch ool r epor ted
a n u n der m in in g of th eir com m itm en t to th e
cla ssr oom . Oppor tu n ities for cu r r icu lu m
developm en t wer e sa id to be r edu ced, little
tim e w a s ava ila ble to con fer w ith collea gu es,
lesson pr epa r a tion w a s a ffected a n d in volvem en t w ith stu den ts ou tside th e cla ssr oom
w a s lim ited. Tea ch er s fou n d th a t th er e w a s
“little tim e for per son a l a n d pr ofession a l
r eflection for developin g a sen se of peda gogic
pu r pose” (Rober tson , 1993). Despite th ese
disin cen tives to tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in
fin a n cia l decision m a k in g, in a sch ool
en vir on m en t wh er e th er e is a per ceived la ck
of open n ess r e ga r din g fin a n cia l in for m a tion
a n d a belief th a t th er e m ay be in efficien t
m a n a gem en t of fu n ds a n d per ceived bia s in
th e a lloca tion of r esou r ces, it is lik ely th a t
tea ch er s w ill seek som e level of in volvem en t
in a n a ttem pt to secu r e efficien cy a n d equ ity
in r esou r ce a lloca tion .
Theory as a basis for best practice
Alth ou gh th er e h a s been con sider a ble
r esea r ch in to pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g in gen er a l, little h a s been don e specifica lly in th e a r ea of tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in
fin a n cia l decision m a k in g. Resea r ch er s
a ppea r to h ave com bin ed fin a n cia l issu es
w ith oth er decision issu es. At th e sa m e tim e,
edu ca tion a l a dm in istr a tor s seem r elu cta n t to
a ck n ow ledge th e n eed for a th eor etica l
a ppr oa ch to th e pr ocess of decision m a k in g,
feelin g th a t su ch a n a ppr oa ch wou ld be too
fa r r em oved fr om th e r ea lities of ever yday
pr a ctice (Bu sh , 1989). Bu sh r epor ts th a t m a n y
pr a ctition er s pr efer to fa ce th e ch a llen ges of
devolved fin a n cia l r espon sibility by a pplyin g
a “tr ia l a n d er r or ” a ppr oa ch r a th er th a n by
wor k in g w ith in a n esta blish ed set of th eor etica l gu idelin es. Th is a ppr oa ch is, of cou r se, a
for m of th eor izin g ba sed on “u n spok en
a ssu m ption s a n d u n r ecogn ized lim ita tion s”
(Hu gh es, 1986) a n d ten ds to pr odu ce a ver y
n a r r ow ou tlook on or ga n iza tion a l
pr ocedu r es. A cen tr a l pu r pose of th is pa per is
to pr opose a th eor etica l fr a m ewor k for
r esea r ch in th e a r ea of tea ch er in volvem en t
in fi n a n cia l decision m a k in g.
In con str u ctin g th e fr a m ewor k , th is pa per
is gu ided by th e th eor y developed th r ou gh th e
liter a tu r e on pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g
a n d or ga n iza tion a l ou tcom es. A deta iled
a n a lysis of th is liter a tu r e w ill a lso iden tify
specia l situ a tion a l fa ctor s th a t a ppea r to
a ffect tea ch er s’ a ttitu des tow a r ds pa r ticipa tion in fin a n cia l decision -m a k in g pr ocesses.
Relevant research
A n u m ber of th eor etica l m odels h ave been
u sed to expla in pa r ticipa tive decision -m a k in g
pr ocesses in sch ools (Ba ch a r a ch et a l., 1990;
Hoy a n d Misk el, 1991; Hoy a n d Ta r ter, 1993;
Moh r m a n et a l., 1978). Hoy a n d Ta r ter (1993)
expa n ded pr eviou s r esea r ch (Ba r n a r d, 1938;
Br idges, 1967; Hoy a n d Misk el, 1991; Sim on ,
1947) to develop a n or m a tive m odel of pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g in sch ools ba sed on
Sim on ’s zon e of a ccepta n ce. Th is zon e w a s
descr ibed a s th e r a n ge of decision a l issu es
w ith in wh ich su bor din a tes wou ld a ccept th e
decision s of th eir su per ior s. Th e zon e is con ceived a s a “two-dim en sion a l con str u ct
[ 95 ]
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
[ 96 ]
defin ed by r eleva n ce a n d exper tise” (Hoy a n d
Ta r ter, 1993, p. 5). Hoy a n d Ta r ter (1993) pr oposed th a t if tea ch er s h ave a per son a l sta k e in
th e issu e, a n d th e k n ow ledge to con tr ibu te,
th en th ey sh ou ld be in volved in th e decision m a k in g pr ocess. Th e exten t of th eir in volvem en t wou ld be deter m in ed by th e pr in cipa l’s
per ception of th eir com m itm en t to th e
or ga n iza tion a l goa ls of th e sch ool.
Th e Hoy a n d Ta r ter m odel a ssu m es th a t
pr in cipa ls deter m in e th e zon e of a ccepta n ce
for th eir tea ch er s (Rice a n d Sch n eider, 1992).
However, a dm in istr a tor s’ per ception s of th eir
ow n zon e of in flu en ce a r e gen er a lly gr ea ter
th a n th e tea ch er s’ per ception s of th eir zon e of
a ccepta n ce (Clea r a n d Sea ger, 1971). A
tea ch er ’s zon e of a ccepta n ce is n ot exter n a lly
deter m in ed. It is a n a m a lga m of per son a lity,
exper ien ces, r ole expecta tion s a n d va r iou s
situ a tion a l va r ia bles su ch a s a n in dividu a l’s
per ception of th e sch ool en vir on m en t a n d th e
sch ool’s a dm in istr a tor s.
Tea ch er s h ave been fou n d to r a te “tim e” a s
th e m a in deter r en t to in volvem en t in decision
m a k in g (Du k e et a l., 1980). Th er efor e, th e Hoy
a n d Ta r ter m odel fa ils to con sider situ a tion s
wh er e som e tea ch er s, even th ou gh exper tise
a n d r eleva n ce exist, pr efer to exten d th eir
zon e of a ccepta n ce a n d a llow cer ta in decision s to be m a de by oth er s. Su ch situ a tion s
cou ld r eflect a tea ch er ’s a bsolu te pr efer en ce
for th e cla ssr oom or cou ld r efl ect th e in flu en ce of situ a tion a l fa ctor s su ch a s decision
con ten t, open n ess of com m u n ica tion a n d
tr u st in th e a dm in istr a tion . In su ch cir cu m sta n ces “in dividu a ls m ay feel less str on gly
a bou t th e n eed to pa r ticipa te in th e decision m a k in g pr ocess” (Con ley et a l., 1988).
Th e con cept of decision con ten t is im por ta n t for a m or e com plete u n der sta n din g of
pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g a n d th e
a ssocia tion between th e in dividu a l a n d th e
pa r ticu la r decision issu e w a s in vestiga ted
(Moh r m a n et a l., 1978) u sin g P a r son ’s (1960)
fu n ction a l a n a lysis to iden tify two decision a l
dom a in s (tech n ica l a n d m a n a ger ia l). Th e
tech n ica l dom a in en com pa sses issu es
dir ectly r ela ted to th e per for m a n ce of th e
oper a tion a l fu n ction s of th e or ga n iza tion ; on e
of th e m a in pu r poses of th e m a n a ger ia l
dom a in is to pr ovide th e r esou r ces r equ ir ed
to su ppor t th e tech n ica l fu n ction . In th e stu dy
by Moh r m a n et a l. (1978) 12 decision a l a r ea s
(Alu tto a n d Bela sco, 1972) wer e u sed a n d
th ese, a s expected, fa ctor ed in to two decision
dom a in s. Th e fin a n cia l issu e “pla n n in g
sch ool bu dgets” w a s fou n d to fi t in th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in .
Usin g th is m u lti-dom a in a ppr oa ch ,
Moh r m a n et a l. (1978) fou n d th a t tea ch er s
r epor ted a h igh er level of a ctu a l a n d desir ed
involvem en t in th e tech n ica l dom a in th a n in
th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in . However, in appa r en t
con tr a diction , th eir level of desir ed in volvem en t in m a n a ger ia l decision m a k in g w a s
fou n d to be h igh er th a n th eir level of a ctu a l
involvem en t. In a ttem ptin g to expla in th is
a ppa r en t pa r a dox, th e r esea r ch er s pr oposed
th a t tea ch er s wer e m or e con cer n ed w ith th e
level of co-or din a tion between th e m a n a ger ia l
a n d tech n ica l dom a in s th a n w ith th eir dir ect
pa r ticipa tion in m a n a ger ia l decision m a k in g.
Th e difficu lty in clea r ly sepa r a tin g issu es
in to th e two dom a in s w a s a lso seen a s a possible expla n a tion for th e a n om a ly (Con ley,
1991). Tea ch er s’ desir e to in cr ea se th eir pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g in th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in m ay r eflect th eir la ck of tr u st in
th e decision m a k er s a n d th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocesses. Th eir in cr ea sed desir ed in volvem en t m ay be seen a s a “bu ffer ” a ga in st
a ttem pts by m a n a gem en t to r edu ce a n y in fl u en ce ga in ed by tea ch er s in th e in str u ction a l
a r ea . Tea ch er s m ay see th eir in volvem en t in
m a n a ger ia l decision m a k in g to be n ecessa r y
to sa fe gu a r d th eir in flu en ce over cla ssr oom
pr a ctice, r a th er th a n for a n y in tr in sica lly
wor th wh ile pu r pose (Moh r m a n et a l., 1978;
Th om pson , 1967). Th eir r ea ction s m ay a lso
stem fr om a per ception th a t a dm in istr a tor s
fr equ en tly per ceive pa r ticipa tion a s som eth in g a ltr u istica lly bestowed on tea ch er s
(Con ley et a l., 1988), r a th er th a n a s a pr ofession a l con tr ibu tion by tea ch er s. Th ese r esu lts
a r e gen er a lly con sisten t w ith oth er fin din gs
(Ba ch a r a ch et a l., 1990; Sch n eider, 1984).
Befor e in fer en ces con cer n in g tea ch er s’
desir ed in volvem en t in fin a n cia l decision
m a k in g a r e dr aw n fr om th e wor k of
Moh r m a n et a l. (1978), con sider a tion sh ou ld
be given to th e n a tu r e of th e pa r ticu la r decision a l issu es in th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in . In
th is r esea r ch (Moh r m a n et a l., 1978) th e fin a n cia l decision issu e “pla n n in g sch ool bu dgets”
w a s n ot descr ibed in su fficien t deta il for
pa r ticipa n ts in th e r esea r ch to a scer ta in
wh eth er “sch ool bu dgets” r efer r ed to “wh ole
sch ool” r esou r ce a lloca tion , or a lloca tion
w ith in a pa r ticu la r tea ch in g a r ea , or a com bin a tion of th e two. Beca u se of th is, it is n ot
possible to decide wh eth er th is fin a n cia l
decision issu e lies in th e m a n a ger ia l or in th e
tech n ica l dom a in . Ba ch a r a ch et a l. (1990)
exten ded th e decision a l dom a in s pr oposed by
Moh r m a n et a l. (1978) a n d iden tified decision
issu es ba sed on th e con cept of oper a tion a l
(tech n ica l) a n d str a te gic (m a n a ger ia l)
dom a in s, a n d wh eth er th e pa r ticu la r issu e
h a d a dir ect effect on th e in dividu a l or th e
or ga n iza tion . Th ese two dim en sion s gen er a ted fou r decision a l dom a in s. Usin g th is
cla ssifica tion , “wh ole sch ool bu dgetin g”
wou ld lie in th e str a te gic (m a n a ger ia l)/ or ga n isa tion a l dom a in , wh ile “bu dgetin g for
specific tea ch in g a r ea s” wou ld be in th e
str a te gic (m a n a ger ia l)/ in dividu a l dom a in . In
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
th e stu dy, 19 decision item s wer e u sed a n d
wer e fou n d to fa ctor in to th e fou r decision a l
dom a in s of th e con ceptu a l fr a m ewor k . F in a n cia l issu es wer e a ga in clu ster ed u n der th e
gen er a l h ea din gs of fa cilities pla n n in g, bu dget developm en t a n d expen ditu r e pr ior ities
a n d wer e fa ctor ed in to th e str a te gicor ga n iza tion a l dom a in . F in din gs sh owed th a t
decision a l depr iva tion in th e str a te gicor ga n iza tion a l dom a in w a s n e ga tively r ela ted
to job sa tisfa ction a n d w a s m or e a ppa r en t in
secon da r y th a n in pr im a r y sch ools. Th is
r esu lt w a s expla in ed by th e fa ct th a t
secon da r y tea ch er s wor k in a m or e com plex,
decen tr a lized en vir on m en t th a n pr im a r y
tea ch er s a n d a r e m or e aw a r e of depr iva tion
in r esou r ce a lloca tion a n d oth er fi n a n cia l
issu es, th er eby decr ea sin g th eir job sa tisfa ction . Wh ile th is r esea r ch (Ba ch a r a ch et a l.,
1990) in volved m or e fi n a n cia l issu es th a n
pr eviou s stu dies, it did n ot clea r ly iden tify
th em a s poten tia lly h avin g a dir ect or in dir ect effect on in str u ction a l a ctivities.
Rice a n d Sch n eider (1992) r eplica ted a stu dy
ca r r ied ou t by Th ier ba ch in 1980 a n d r epor ted
in Sch n eider (1984). Th ey sou gh t to deter m in e
wh eth er a deca de of r efor m in th e a r ea of
tea ch er em power m en t h a d sign ifica n tly
ch a n ged tea ch er s’ levels of decision a l pa r ticipa tion , sa tisfa ction w ith decision -m a k in g
pr ocesses a n d in ter est a n d exper tise in decision a l issu es. Th e stu dy specifica lly con sider ed wh eth er tea ch er s’ in ter ests in tech n ica l
a n d m a n a ger ia l issu es h a d ch a n ged over
tim e. F a ctor a n a lysis w a s a pplied to 20 decision a l issu es, dividin g th em in to two
dom a in s, in str u ction / tech n ica l a n d sch oolw ide/ m a n a ger ia l. Th is stu dy clea r ly iden tified two fin a n cia l issu es con ta in ed in th e
listin g of decision issu es. “P r epa r in g su bject
depa r tm en t or in str u ction a l tea m bu dgets”
w a s fou n d in th e in str u ction a l/ tech n ica l
dom a in , wh ile “a lloca tin g m a ter ia ls a n d
equ ipm en t to su bject depa r tm en ts or tea m s”
w a s loca ted in th e sch oolw ide/ m a n a ger ia l
dom a in . A clea r distin ction w a s m a de
between fin a n cia l issu es dir ectly a ssocia ted
w ith in str u ction a l a ctivities a n d th ose
r ela ted m or e to sch oolw ide pr ocedu r es.
Resu lts fr om th e stu dy in dica ted th a t despite
ten yea r s of a tten tion to tea ch er em power m en t, tea ch er s con tin u ed to desir e m or e
pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g th a n th ey
a r e cu r r en tly a ffor ded. Th e r eplica ted stu dy
sh owed, a s did th e or igin a l stu dy, th a t tea ch er s r epor ted low levels of a ctu a l in volvem en t
a n d h igh er levels of desir ed in volvem en t in
m a n a ger ia l/ sch oolw ide issu es. Wh ile tea ch er s con tin u ed to r epor t h igh er levels of decision a l depr iva tion in m a n a ger ia l issu es th a n
in in str u ction a l issu es, a n oticea ble tr en d h a d
em er ged w ith fi n a n cia l decision a l issu es.
Bu dgetin g, dir ectly r ela ted to cla ssr oom
a ctivities, r epor ted th e secon d h igh est level of
depr iva tion in th e tech n ica l dom a in , wh ile
sch oolw ide r esou r ce a lloca tion w a s on e of th e
lowest r epor ted levels of depr iva tion in th e
m a n a ger ia l dom a in . It is im por ta n t to n ote
th a t th e in cr ea se in em ph a sis on fi n a n cia l
issu es coin cides w ith a globa l tr en d to decen tr a lize fi n a n cia l decision s to th e poin t of
deliver y of th e edu ca tion a l ser vice. Th e m a in
deliver y poin t for th ese ser vices is th e cla ssr oom ; h en ce it is vita l th a t r eleva n t tech n ica l
decision s a r e tr u ly devolved to th is level a n d
n ot m er ely r e-cen tr a lized in th e pr in cipa l a n d
a sm a ll n u m ber of execu tive sta ff.
Alth ou gh a n a n a lysis of th e r esea r ch liter a tu r e on tea ch er in volvem en t in decision m a k in g h a s u n cover ed n o deta iled em pir ica l stu dies in to tea ch er s’ pa r ticipa tion in fin a n cia l
decision m a k in g, it h a s r a ised a n u m ber of
sign ifica n t qu estion s. Ca n fin a n cia l issu es be
ca te gor ized in to tech n ica l a n d m a n a ger ia l
dom a in s? Do tea ch er s w a n t to be in volved in
fin a n cia l decision m a k in g in th e tech n ica l
dom a in ? Wh a t fa ctor s a ffect tea ch er s’ a ttitu des tow a r ds pa r ticipa tion in gen er a l decision m a k in g in th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in ? Do
tea ch er s feel th eir level of in flu en ce in deter m in in g decision ou tcom es is com m en su r a te
w ith th eir level of in volvem en t in th e decision -m a k in g pr ocess?
In con sider in g th ese qu estion s a n u m ber of
poin ts em er ge. Tea ch er s m ay h ave a pr efer en ce for in volvem en t in decision m a k in g th a t
dir ectly a ffects th eir cla ssr oom pr a ctice
(Ba ch u s, 1992; Br idges, 1967; Du k e, 1978;
Lor tie, 1975); fu ll disclosu r e of a ll fin a n cia l
in for m a tion is r e ga r ded by tea ch er s a s essen tia l for effective fi n a n cia l decision m a k in g
(Ha r tm a n , 1985); a n d effective decision m a k in g in fi n a n cia l m a n a gem en t r elies on a clim a te of tr u st, open n ess a n d m u tu a l ben efit
(Ca ldwell a n d Misko, 1984).
Oth er stu dies (Ba ch u s, 1992; Moh r m a n et
a l., 1978; Rice a n d Sch n eider, 1992) h ave
r evea led th a t tea ch er s r epor ted h igh er levels
of depr iva tion r e ga r din g m a n a ger ia l or
sch oolw ide issu es. Th is a ppa r en tly pa r a doxica l situ a tion , wh er e tea ch er s h ave in dica ted a
desir e for gr ea ter pa r ticipa tion in a n a r ea in
wh ich th ey der ive little sa tisfa ction , h a s been
a ddr essed by a n u m ber of r esea r ch er s
(Con ley, 1989; Moh r m a n et a l., 1978;
Th om pson , 1967). It w a s pa r tly expla in ed by
F r a se a n d Sor en son in ter m s of som e tea ch er s h avin g “h igh gr ow th n eeds” (1992, p. 40).
Th a t is, su ch tea ch er s m ay h ave a str on g
desir e for pr ofession a l gr ow th a n d in or der to
a ch ieve job sa tisfa ction r equ ir e in volvem en t
in sh a r ed decision -m a k in g str u ctu r es (F a r ber
a n d Miller, 1982). Som e of th ese tea ch er s w ill,
u n dou btedly, h ave m a n a ger ia l a spir a tion s
a n d w ill con sider in volvem en t a n d exper ien ce in fi n a n cia l a n d n on -fin a n cia l
[ 97 ]
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
m a n a gem en t issu es essen tia l to fu tu r e ca r eer
oppor tu n ities. Th er e is n o pa r a dox for th ese
tea ch er s. Th ey desir e to be in volved a n d w ill
a ch ieve sa tisfa ction fr om th eir in volvem en t.
N ot a ll tea ch er s desir e a dva n cem en t in th e
m a n a ger ia l sector ; som e see even a low level
of in volvem en t in fi n a n cia l decision m a k in g
in n on -tech n ica l or m a n a ger ia l issu es a s
detr a ctin g fr om va lu a ble cla ssr oom tim e.
Th ey view m a n a ger ia l fin a n cia l decision
m a k in g on ly in ter m s of a m ech a n ism for
deliver in g decision ou tcom es su ppor tive of
th eir tea ch in g a ctivities. If th e situ a tion a l
con dition s n ecessa r y for th is m ech a n ism to
wor k effectively a r e per ceived by tea ch er s to
be in pla ce, th en th eir desir e to be in volved in
th e pr ocess is lik ely to decr ea se. If tea ch er s
ju dge th e decision ou tcom es to be
in equ ita ble, ill-con ceived a n d n ot su ppor tive
of th eir tea ch in g effor ts th en th ey w ill feel it
n ecessa r y to be in volved. A m a jor situ a tion a l
va r ia ble a ssocia ted w ith th ese con dition s is
con ceptu a lized a s “or ga n iza tion a l tr u st”
(Ga m son , 1968).
The concept of trust and financial
decision making
In a stu dy by Alu tto a n d Bela sco (1972), tr u st,
con ceived a s tea ch er s’ per ception s of th e
fr ien dlin ess or oth er w ise of th eir socia l en vir on m en t, w a s n ot fou n d to be sign ifica n tly
a ssocia ted w ith va r yin g levels of sa tisfa ction .
Th is r esu lt w a s con tr a r y to th e ea r lier wor k
of Ben n is (1967) wh o fou n d th a t h igh er levels
of job sa tisfa ction wer e a ssocia ted w ith
in cr ea sed tr u st. Both stu dies wer e lim ited by
sm a ll sa m ples a n d both defin ed tr u st fr om a
per son a l r a th er th a n or ga n iza tion a l per spective.
Som e r esea r ch er s per ceived tr u st a s a
globa l per son a lity tr a it (Rosen ber g, 1956;
Rotter, 1971) wh ile oth er s (Ga m son , 1968)
con sider ed it fr om a n or ga n iza tion a l or ien ta tion . Or ga n iza tion a l tr u st is defi n ed a s th e
pr oba bility th a t cer ta in decision ou tcom es,
pr efer r ed by a n in dividu a l or gr ou p, w ill
r esu lt w ith ou t th e in volvem en t of th a t in dividu a l or gr ou p in th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocess. It is a r gu ed th a t or ga n iza tion a l tr u st
is th e m a jor deter m in a n t of a n in dividu a l’s
or ien ta tion tow a r ds th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocesses of th e or ga n iza tion . In Ga m son ’s
(1968) stu dy, or ga n iza tion a l tr u st w a s str on gly
r ela ted both to over a ll sa tisfa ction a n d to
sa tisfa ction w ith in volvem en t in decision
m a k in g, wh ile per son a l tr u st fa iled to pr edict
su ch a ssocia tion s.
Ga m son ’s con cept of tr u st w a s descr ibed by
Dr iscoll (1978) a s a politica l a ssessm en t of a n
or ga n iza tion ’s decision m a k er s. He fou n d th a t,
r ega r dless of th e r ela tion sh ip between a ctu a l
[ 98 ]
a n d desir ed pa r ticipa tion , tea ch er s w ith a
gr ea ter degr ee of tr u st in h ier a r ch ica l decision m a ker s wer e m or e sa tisfied w ith th eir
level of pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g.
Tr u st, iden tified a s in ter per son a l or dya dic
tr u st, m ay a lso be con ceived a s a globa l m ea su r e of tea ch er s’ per ception s of th e decision
m a k er s or th e decision -m a k in g pr ocesses
(Scott, 1980). Resea r ch er s (Bu tler a n d
Ca n tr ell, 1984; Rober ts a n d O’Reilly, 1974;
Tya gi, 1985) h ave u sed th e m u lti-dim en sion a l
n a tu r e of tr u st, a s explor ed by J en n in gs (1971)
a n d Ga ba r r o (1978), to deter m in e a m ea su r e
of dya dic tr u st. Th e dim en sion s u sed
in clu ded in te gr ity, com peten ce, con sisten cy,
loya lty, fa ir n ess a n d open n ess.
Tr u st, in a fin a n cia l con text, m ay be con ceptu a lized in ter m s of both or ga n iza tion a l
a n d dya dic tr u st. Th is tr u st ca n be con ceived
a s tea ch er s’ per ception s of: th e in te gr ity of
th e decision m a k er s a n d th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocesses; th e exper tise of th e decision
m a k er s a n d th e effectiven ess of th e decision m a k in g pr ocesses; th e con sisten cy of th e
decision ou tcom es, th e de gr ee of fa ir n ess of
th e decision ou tcom es; a n d th e de gr ee of
disclosu r e of fi n a n cia l in for m a tion .
If tea ch er s a r e wor k in g in a n en vir on m en t
wh er e th er e is fu ll disclosu r e of fi n a n cia l
in for m a tion , a n d wh er e th ey per ceive th a t
u n bia sed decision s a r e m a de by decision
m a k er s sk illed in th e pa r ticu la r fin a n cia l
decision a r ea , th en th eir level of tr u st w ill be
h igh . Stu dies (Du k e et a l., 1980) h ave sh ow n
th a t tea ch er s a r e well aw a r e of th e costs a s
well a s th e ben efits a ssocia ted w ith pa r ticipa tion in a n y for m of decision m a k in g. Th u s, if
tr u st in th e sch ool’s fin a n cia l decision
m a k er s a n d decision -m a k in g pr ocesses is
h igh , tea ch er s m ay, th r ou gh a sim ple costben efit a n a lysis, be ver y selective wh en deter m in in g th e n a tu r e of th e fin a n cia l decision
issu es w ith wh ich th ey w ill becom e in volved.
Th eir focu s w ill a lm ost cer ta in ly th en be on
th ose decision s m or e dir ectly a ffectin g th eir
wor k a s tea ch er s.
A conceptual framework
An a n a lysis of r eleva n t r esea r ch liter a tu r e in
th e a r ea of tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in decision
m a k in g a n d th e con cepts of or ga n iza tion a l
a n d dya dic tr u st m ay be u sed to develop a
th eor etica l fr a m ewor k for tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g in a fin a n cia l con text.
F in a n cia l decision s ca n be a lloca ted in to
two distin ct dom a in s: th e tech n ica l dom a in ,
wh ich en com pa sses issu es dir ectly r ela ted to
in str u ction a l or cla ssr oom fu n ction s, a n d th e
m a n a ger ia l dom a in , wh ich pr ovides sch oolw ide su ppor t for th e in str u ction a l a ctivities.
Tea ch er s h ave a gr ea ter desir e to in flu en ce
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
decision s per ta in in g dir ectly to in str u ction a l
m a tter s th a n to in flu en ce decision s r ela tin g
to m a n a ger ia l issu es (Du k e, 1978; Lor tie,
1975). Th eir desir ed pa r ticipa tion in th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in depen ds on th eir per ception s
of th e fin a n cia l decision -m a k in g pr ocesses
a n d of fin a n cia l decision m a k er s. An im por ta n t situ a tion a l va r ia ble a ffectin g th ese per ception s h a s been iden tified a s or ga n iza tion a l
a n d dya dic tr u st (tr u st). Tr u st h a s been con ceptu a lized in ter m s of th e in te gr ity, con sisten cy a n d fa ir n ess of th e decision m a k er s a n d
th e decision -m a k in g pr ocesses; th e exper tise
of th e decision m a k er s, th e effectiven ess of
th e pr ocesses a n d th e de gr ee of disclosu r e of
fin a n cia l in for m a tion .
Practical implications for schools
Th is pa per h a s con sider ed pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g fr om a th eor etica l per spective.
In or der to dr aw som e pr a ctica l str a te gies
fr om th e con ceptu a l fr a m ewor k pr esen ted, it
is n ecessa r y fi r st to view pa r ticipa tive fin a n cia l decision m a k in g in th e over a ll con text of
th e fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t of sch ools.
If sch ools a r e to cr ea te wor k in g en vir on m en ts for tea ch er s ba sed on tr u st, th en a
n u m ber of issu es, both in ter n a l a n d exter n a l
to sch ools, m u st fi r st be a ddr essed. Som e of
th ese issu es a r e beyon d th e scope of th is
pa per. Th ey in clu de a r eview of th e w ay
sch ools a r e fu n ded, ba sed on equ ity con sider a tion s; cla r ifi ca tion of th e r ole of th e sch ool
cou n cil in th e fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t of th e
sch ool; deter m in a tion of th e r ole of th e pr in cipa l, be it fin a n cia l m a n a ger, edu ca tion a l
lea der or a com bin a tion of both ; tr a in in g of
k ey per son n el (on e or two) in fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t of sch ools; a n d a ba sic level of tr a in in g for cost cen tr e m a n a ger s (su bject coor din a tor s a n d th e lik e) in th e a r ea s of str a tegic m a n a gem en t pr ocesses, bu dgetin g, n e gotia tion a n d tea m wor k .
On ce th ese issu es a r e r esolved, it is possible
to esta blish a n en vir on m en t of tr u st th r ou gh
th e im plem en ta tion of str u ctu r es a n d
pr ocesses ba sed on in te gr ity, open n ess, con sisten cy, fa ir n ess a n d a pr ofession a l a ppr oa ch
to fin a n cia l decision m a k in g. Th ese pr ocesses
m u st clea r ly distin gu ish between th e fin a n cia l issu es a ssocia ted w ith th e tech n ica l
a spects a n d th ose a ssocia ted w ith th e m a n a ger ia l a spects of sch ools. Th is w ill give
tea ch er s a n oppor tu n ity to m in im ize th eir
involvem en t in fi n a n cia l issu es r ela tin g to th e
m a n a ger ia l or cor por a te life of th e sch ool a n d
to con cen tr a te th eir effor ts on a com m itm en t
to cla ssr oom pr a ctice a n d to th eir stu den ts.
A financial decision-making model
Th e follow in g m odel is su ggested for a sch ool
wh er e th e m a n a gem en t ph ilosoph y is ba sed
on th e con cept of tr u st a s con ceptu a lized in
th is pa per. Th e m odel a ssu m es th a t th e u ltim a te r espon sibility for th e fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t of th e sch ool r ests w ith th e ch ief
execu tive officer (CE O) of th e sch ool (tr a dition a lly th e pr in cipa l, a lth ou gh th is n eed n ot
be th e ca se). Th e sch ool cou n cil is th e m a in
gover n in g body of th e sch ool. Th e cou n cil is
a ssisted by th e CE O a n d u su a lly com pr ises
r epr esen ta tives of th e sch ool com m u n ity,
in clu din g tea ch er s a n d in som e
cir cu m sta n ces sen ior stu den ts. A sta ff
fin a n ce com m ittee (SF C) pr epa r es th e bu dget
wor k pa per s a n d a dvises th e CE O on a ll fin a n cia l m a tter s. Th is com m ittee sh ou ld con sist
of two or th r ee m em ber s of th e sta ff wh o h ave
r eceived in ten sive tr a in in g in fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t of sch ools. In som e ca ses th e pr in cipa l m ay be a m em ber of th is com m ittee. Mem ber sh ip of th e SF C sh ou ld be a ck n ow ledged
by a per iod a llow a n ce a n d/ or by a m on eta r y
a llow a n ce.
Th e m a in fu n ction s of th e SF C a r e: to estim a te th e sch ool’s a n n u a l r even u e; to pr ovide
r eleva n t in for m a tion to a ll cost cen tr e m a n a ger s (m a n a ger ia l a n d tech n ica l) in or der to
a ssist th em w ith th eir bu dget su bm ission s; to
colla te bu dget in for m a tion fr om a ll cost cen tr es; a n d to pr epa r e wor k docu m en ts for th e
bu dget wor k gr ou p (BWG). Th ese docu m en ts
deta il a ll a n ticipa ted r even u e a n d pr oposed
bu dgets for a ll m a n a ger ia l a n d tech n ica l cost
cen tr es. Th e BWG u su a lly com pr ises th e CE O
(a ssu m ed to be th e pr in cipa l), a r epr esen ta tive fr om th e SF C a n d a ll cost cen tr e m a n a ger s, a n d m eets to decide on r equ ir ed expen ditu r e cu ts in ca ses wh er e th e tota l of th e
expen ses fr om a ll cost cen tr es exceeds th e
a n ticipa ted r even u e of th e sch ool. Th e SF C
does n ot h ave a decision -m a k in g r ole; it a cts
a s a secr eta r ia t to th e BWG a n d sh ou ld be
seen a s a n u n bia sed collator a n d distr ibu tor of
in for m a tion . Th e SF C pr epa r es th e fin a l bu dget a n d for w a r ds it to th e CE O for pr esen ta tion to a n d r a tifica tion by th e sch ool cou n cil.
Th e flow ch a r t in F igu r e 1 illu str a tes th e
decision -m a k in g sequ en ce wh ich occu r s in
th e a r ea of fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t. It is im por ta n t to n ote th a t th e on ly in volvem en t of
cla ssr oom tea ch er s in fin a n cia l decision
m a k in g is wh en th ey m eet w ith th eir cost
cen tr e gr ou ps to pr epa r e a n d pr ior itize th eir
r esou r ce r equ ir em en ts for th e com in g yea r.
Th e de gr ee of tr u st a ssocia ted w ith th e
im plem en ta tion of th e m odel depen ds, to a
la r ge exten t, on th e policies u n der pin n in g th e
str u ctu r e a n d pr ocesses a n d on th e w ay th e
pa r ticipa n ts in th e decision m a k in g per ceive
a n d ca r r y ou t th eir r oles. Th e sch ool cou n cil,
th r ou gh th e pr in cipa l a n d th e SF C, m u st h ave
a policy of fu ll disclosu r e of a ll fin a n cia l in for m a tion (Ha r tm a n , 1985). Mon th ly ca sh flow
sta tem en ts a n d ca sh position r epor ts, a fter
r a tifica tion by th e sch ool cou n cil, sh ou ld be
[ 99 ]
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
m a de ava ila ble to a ll cost cen tr e m a n a ger s
a n d th eir tea m s.
P a r ticipa n ts in th e pr ocess n eed to be
a cu tely aw a r e of th eir r oles a n d r espon sibilities. Th e pr in cipa l’s m a in r ole is to en su r e
th a t decision s a r e a lw ays m a de w ith in th e
br oa d fr a m ewor k of sch ool n eeds (esta blish ed
in th e m ission sta tem en t) a n d th e policies of
a n y exter n a l a u th or ity. Th e pr in cipa l sh ou ld
tr y to m in im ize a n y self-ser vin g beh aviou r
fr om cost cen tr e m a n a ger s (Du ign a n , 1990), to
h igh ligh t a n y obviou s im ba la n ces in th e
a lloca tion of r esou r ces a n d to fa cilita te cor dia l r ela tion s w ith in th e gr ou p. Cost cen tr e
m a n a ger s h ave a cr itica l r ole in th e pr ocess.
Th ey m u st en th u sia stica lly pu r su e th e
r esou r ces r equ ir ed to im plem en t th eir tea m ’s
a ca dem ic goa ls, wh ile bein g m in dfu l of th e
over a ll n eeds of th e sch ool. Th ey m u st u n der sta n d th e im plicit r u les of th e pr ocess a n d
avoid a m bit r equ ests a n d cla im s a bou t th e
dir e con sequ en ces th a t w ill r esu lt sh ou ld
cla im a n ts be den ied a pa r ticu la r bu dget
r equ est. Cost cen tr e m a n a ger s sh ou ld h ave a
th or ou gh u n der sta n din g of th e com plete
fin a n cia l decision -m a k in g pr ocess a n d,
th r ou gh th eir beh aviou r a n d com m en t, h elp
to convey to a ll sta ff th e in te gr ity a n d effectiven ess of th e pr ocess.
If th e pr ocess is per ceived by tea ch er s to be
effective, open a n d fa ir, it w ill h elp to a llay th e
su spicion s a n d u n cer ta in ties com m on ly a ssocia ted w ith fi n a n cia l decision m a k in g. P a r ticipa tion a t a ll levels in th e pr ocess (fr om tea m
m em ber to m a n a ger ) develops a sen se of
com m itm en t, coh esion a n d con fi den ce a m on g
sta ff. Th r ou gh th e cost cen tr e m a n a ger s,
tea ch er s w ill obta in a wh ole-sch ool view of
th e r esou r ce n eeds a n d pr ior ities. Cost cen tr e
Figure 1
Financ ial de c isio n-making mo de l
[ 100 ]
m a n a ger s w ill h ave a vested in ter est in
r esou r ce a lloca tion decision s bein g a ccepted
by th eir tea m (Ha r tm a n , 1985).
Th e pr ocess w ill gr ea tly r edu ce th e n eed for
th e m a jor ity of tea ch er s to be in volved in
m a n a ger ia l fin a n cia l issu es a n d w ill m in im ize tea ch er s’ in volvem en t in fin a n cia l
issu es in th e tech n ica l dom a in . Th is, in tu r n ,
sh ou ld h ave a positive im pa ct on cla ssr oom
pr a ctice.
References
Alu tto, J .A. a n d Bela sco, J .A. (1972), “P a tter n s of
tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in sch ool system decision m a k in g”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion
Qu a r terly, Vol. 9 N o. 1, pp. 27-41.
Ba ch a r a ch , S.B., Ba m ber ger, P., Con ley, S.C. a n d
Ba u er, S. (1990), “Th e dim en sion a lity of decision pa r ticipa tion in edu ca tion a l or ga n isa tion s; th e va lu e of m u lti-dom a in eva lu a tive
a ppr oa ch ”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion Qu a r terly, Vol. 26 N o. 2, pp. 126-67.
Ba ch u s, G. (1992), “Sch ool ba sed m a n a gem en t: do
tea ch er s w a n t m or e in volvem en t in decision
m a k in g?”, Ru ral Edu cator, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-4.
Ba r n a r d, C. (1938), T h e Fu n ction s of th e Ex ecu tiv e,
Ha r va r d Un iver sity P r ess, Ca m br idge, MA.
Ben n is, W. (1967), “Beyon d bu r ea u cr a cy”, in
Holla n der, E . a n d Hu n t, R. (E ds), Cu r ren t
Perspectiv es in S ocia l Psych olog y (2n d ed.),
Oxfor d Un iver sity P r ess, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Br idges, E .M. (1967), “A m odel for sh a r ed decision
m a k in g in th e sch ool pr in cipa lsh ip”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion Qu a r terly, Vol. 3 N o. 1,
pp. 49-61.
Br ow n , D.J . (1990), Decen tra lisa tion a n d S ch ool
B a sed M a n a gem en t, F a lm er P r ess, Lewes.
Bu sh , T. (1989), “Th e n a tu r e of th eor y in edu ca tion a l m a n a gem en t”, in Bu sh , T. (E d.), M a n a gin g Ed u ca tion : T h eor y a n d Pra ctice, Open
Un iver sity P r ess, Milton Keyn es.
Bu tler, J .K. a n d Ca n tr ell, R.S. (1984), “A beh avior a l
decision th eor y a ppr oa ch to m odellin g dya dic
tr u st in su per ior s a n d su bor din a tes”, Psych ologica l R epor ts, Vol. 55, pp. 19-28.
Ca ldwell, B. a n d Misko, J . (1984), “Sch ool-ba sed
bu dgetin g: a fi n a n cia l str a te gy for m eetin g
th e n eeds of stu den ts”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion R eview , Vol. 2 N o. 1, pp. 29-59.
Clea r, D.K. a n d Sea ger, R.C. (1971), “Th e le gitim a cy of a dm in istr a tive in fl u en ce a s per ceived
by selected gr ou ps”, Ed u ca tion a l a n d Ur b a n
S ociety, Vol. 21 N o. 4, pp. 366-79.
Con ley, S. (1989), “Wh o’s on fir st? Sch ool r efor m ,
tea ch er pa r ticipa tion a n d th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocess”, Ed u ca tion a n d Ur b a n S ociety,
Vol. 21 N o. 4, pp. 366-79.
Con ley, S. (1991), “Review of r esea r ch on tea ch er
pa r ticipa tion in sch ool decision m a k in g”, in
Br a n t, D. (E d.), R eview of R esea rch in Ed u ca tion , Am er ica n E du ca tion a l Resea r ch Associa tion , Wa sh in gton , DC.
Con ley, S., Sch m idle, T. a n d Sh edd. J . (1988),
“Tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in th e m a n a gem en t of
sch ool system s”, T ea ch ers College R ecord,
Vol. 90 N o. 2, pp. 232, 259-80.
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
Con w ay, J .A. (1984), “Th e m yth , m yster y, a n d
m a ster y of pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g in
edu ca tion ”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion
Qu a r terly, Vol. 20 N o. 30, pp. 11-39.
Dr iscoll, J . (1978), “Tr u st a n d pa r ticipa tion in
or ga n isa tion a l decision m a k in g a s pr edictor s
of sa tisfa ction ”, A ca d em y of M a n a gem en t
J ou r n a l, Vol. 21 N o. 1, pp. 44-56.
Du ign a n , P.A. (1990), “Sch ool-ba sed decision
m a k in g a n d m a n a gem en t: r etr ospect a n d
pr ospect”, in Ch a pm a n , J . (E d.), S ch ool-b a sed
Decision m a k in g a n d M a n a gem en t, Th e
F a lm er P r ess, Lon don .
Du k e, D. (1978), “Tow a r d r espon sible in n ova tion ”,
T h e Ed u ca tion a l Foru m , Vol. 42, pp. 351-72.
Du k e, D.L., Sh ower s, B.K. a n d Im ber, M. (1980),
“Tea ch er s a n d sh a r ed decision m a k in g: th e
costs a n d ben efi ts of in volvem en t”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion Qu a r terly, Vol. 16 N o. 1,
Win ter, pp. 93-106.
F a r ber, A. a n d Miller, J . (1982), “Tea ch er bu r n ou t:
P sych oedu ca tion a l per spective”, T h e Ed u ca tion Digest, Septem ber.
F r a se, L. a n d Sor en son , L. (1992), “Tea ch er m otiva tion a n d sa tisfa ction : im pa ct on pa r ticipa tor y m a n a gem en t”, N A S S P B u lletin ,
(N a tion a l Appr ecia tion of Secon da r y Sch ool
P r in cipa ls), Vol. 76 N o. 540, pp. 37-43.
Ga ba r r o, J .J . (1978), “Th e developm en t of tr u st,
in fl u en ce a n d expecta tion s”, in Ath os, A. a n d
Ga ba r r o, J .J . (E ds), In terperson a l B eh a vior:
Com m u n ica tion a n d Un d ersta n d in g in R ela tion sh ips, P r en tice-Ha ll, E n glewood Cliffs, N J .
Ga m son , W.A. (1968), Pow er a n d Discon ten t,
Dor sey, Hom ewood, IL.
Ha r tm a n , W. (1985), “P a r ticipa tor y bu dgetin g in
h igh sch ool”, Pla n n in g a n d Ch a n ge, pp. 15-25.
Hoy, W.K. a n d Misk el, C.G. (1991), Ed u ca tion a l
A d m in istra tion : T h eor y, R esea rch a n d
Pra ctice, Ra n dom Hou se, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Hoy, W.K. a n d Ta r ter, C. (1993), “A n or m a tive
th eor y of pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g in
sch ools”, J ou r n a l of Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion , Vol. 31 N o. 3.
Hu gh es, M. (1986), “Th eor y a n d pr a ctice in edu ca tion a l m a n a gem en t”, in Hu gh es, M., Robbin s,
P. a n d Th om a s, H. (E ds), M a n a gin g Ed u ca tion :
T h e S ystem a n d th e In stitu tion , Holt Rin eh a r t
a n d Win ston , Lon don , p. 31.
Im ber, M. a n d Du k e, D.L. (1984), “Tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in sch ool decision m a k in g: a fr a m ewor k for r esea r ch ”, J ou r n a l of Ed u ca tion a l
A d m in istra tion , Vol. 33, pp. 24-34.
J en n in gs, E .E . (1971), R ou tes to th e Ex ecu tiv e S u ite,
McGr aw -Hill, N ew Yor k , N Y.
J on es, D. (1989), “P r ogr a m m e bu dgetin g for colle ges”, in Leva cic, R. (E d.), Fin a n cia l M a n a gem en t in Ed u ca tion , Open Un iver sity P r ess,
Milton Keyn es.
Kir by, P. (1992), “Tea ch er em power m en t depen ds
on n eeds, expecta tion s of pr in cipa ls, sch ools,
distr icts”, N A S S P B u lletin , Vol. 76 N o. 540,
pp. 89-95.
Kn igh t, B. (1993), “Dele ga ted fi n a n cia l m a n a gem en t a n d sch ool effectiven ess”, in Dim m ock ,
C. (E d.), S ch ool-B a sed M a n a gem en t a n d
S ch ool Effectiv en ess, Rou tledge, Lon don .
Lor tie, D. (1975), S ch ool T ea ch er, Un iver sity of
Ch ica go P r ess, Ch ica go, IL.
Moh r m a n , A.M. J r, Cook e, R.A. a n d Moh r m a n ,
S.A. (1978), “P a r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g:
a m u lti-dim en sion a l per spective”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion Qu a r terly, Vol. 14 N o. 1,
pp. 13-19.
P a r son s, T. (1960), S tru ctu re a n d Process in M od er n S ocieties, F r ee P r ess, Glen coe, IL.
Ra sm u ssen , R. a n d Roth stein , R. (1990), “Sh a r ed
decision m a k in g th e fir st yea r ”, Los An geles
Un
the need for trust
Geoffrey Newcombe
Busine ss Manage r, Kambala Girls’ Sc ho o l, Ro se Bay, Australia
John M cCormick
Le c ture r, Sc ho o l o f Educ atio n Studie s, Unive rsity o f Ne w So uth Wale s, Sydne y,
Australia
Fenton Sharpe
Pro fe sso r o f Educ atio nal Administratio n, Sc ho o l o f Educ atio n Studie s, Unive rsity
o f Ne w So uth Wale s, Sydne y, Australia
Suggests that a desire on the
part of teachers to be more
involved in the corporate
affairs of the school may stem
from a lack of trust in the
decision makers and the
decision-making processes.
To assist those involved in the
management of schools,
presents a theoretical framework for research and a
fi nancial decision-making
model, based on the establishment of a management
philosophy built on trust.
Demonstrates how this model
helps to differentiate management and classroom or
technical decisional issues.
Identifi es the roles and
responsibilities of those
involved in the processes.
Outlines procedures for
effective fi nancial decision
making at the school site.
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 ,3 [ 1997] 9 4 –1 0 1
© MCB Unive rsity Pre ss
[ ISSN 0951-354X]
[ 94 ]
Introduction
Th e edu ca tion system s of m a n y cou n tr ies a r e
exper ien cin g a per iod of r a dica l r efor m . Gover n m en ts a r e a ttem ptin g to im pr ove in str u ction a l qu a lity a n d lea r n in g ou tcom es th r ou gh
th e im plem en ta tion of sch ool-ba sed m a n a gem en t (Wh ite, 1989). A dom in a n t th em e of th is
r efor m m ovem en t h a s been th e developm en t
of colle gia l a n d pa r ticipa tive decision -m a k in g
pr ocedu r es a t th e sch ool level (Weiss et a l.,
1992).
Th e focu s on tea ch er in volvem en t in decision m a k in g is n ot w ith ou t h istor ica l pr eceden t (Rice a n d Sch n eider, 1992). E du ca tion a l
r esea r ch er s h ave lon g stu died th e effects of
pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g (Con w ay, 1984;
Rice a n d Sch n eider, 1992). In 1972 Alu tto a n d
Bela sco n oted th a t m u ch of th e r esea r ch h a d
been ba sed on th e im plicit a ssu m ption th a t
tea ch er s h ave a desir e to in cr ea se th eir
a bsolu te in volvem en t in a ll for m s of decision
m a k in g a n d th a t th er e is a dir ect r ela tion sh ip
between in cr ea sed tea ch er pa r ticipa tion a n d
im pr oved edu ca tion a l ou tcom es. Su ch a r ela tion sh ip r em a in s u n con fir m ed (Im ber a n d
Du k e, 1984; Taylor a n d Levin e, 1991).
A m a jor com pon en t of sch ool-ba sed m a n a gem en t r efor m h a s been th e dele ga tion of
fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t to th e sch ool site. Th e
exten t of dele ga tion in m a n y cou n tr ies su ggests th a t edu ca tion a u th or ities believe th a t
it w ill lea d to im pr oved sch ool effectiven ess
(Kn igh t, 1993). Th e r a tion a le for r efor m
a ppea r s to be th a t fin a n cia l decision m a k in g
n ea r th e poin t of deliver y of ser vice w ill
closely r eflect th e n eeds a n d pr ior ities of th e
stu den ts a n d th e sch ool com m u n ity. Dele ga tion of fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t to th e sch ool
level h a s a n u m ber of cr itica l im plica tion s for
pr in cipa ls a n d tea ch er s if th is belief is to be
oper a tion a lized. Ca r efu l str a te gic m a n a gem en t is r equ ir ed for pr ogr a m m es, r espon sive
to sch ool n eeds, to be iden tifi ed, pr ior itized,
im plem en ted, eva lu a ted a n d r eviewed. Tr a dition a l bu dgetin g pr ocedu r es sh ou ld be su ppor ted by a com pon en t of pr ogr a m m e bu dgetin g to en su r e th a t r esou r ce expen ditu r e is
closely r ela ted to edu ca tion a l ou tcom es
(J on es, 1989). P r ogr a m m e bu dgetin g n ot on ly
costs th e r esou r ces to be pr ovided bu t iden tifies th e sch ool’s policies u n der wh ich th e
pa r ticu la r ser vices or pr ogr a m m es a r e ju stified.
Devolu tion of fi n a n cia l m a n a gem en t to th e
sch ool site r ecogn izes th e im por ta n ce of pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g in edu ca tion a l
or ga n iza tion s (Du ign a n , 1990). Th e level of
pa r ticipa tion in fin a n cia l decision m a k in g
n eeds to be exten ded to th e cla ssr oom
tea ch er ; oth er w ise sch ool site fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t cou ld be ju st a n oth er for m of cen tr a lized con tr ol, w ith th e pr in cipa l a t th e
“cen tr e”. However, in a n a ttem pt to esta blish
a h igh level of tea ch er in volvem en t in decision m a k in g a n d to pr om ote a n im a ge of selfm a n a gem en t, som e sch ools h ave esta blish ed
a dm in istr a tive str u ctu r es th a t, in effect,
distr a ct tea ch er s fr om th eir pr im a r y in str u ction a l r ole (Rober tson , 1993). Som e tea ch er s
a r e r equ ir ed to a tten d m a n y m eetin gs su ch a s
bu dget com m ittees, fin a n cia l pla n n in g
gr ou ps a n d sta ff developm en t com m ittees.
Th ey a r e en cou r a ged to be in volved in a
pleth or a of fin a n cia l issu es r a n gin g fr om
in com e gen er a tion to m a r k etin g a n d lon gter m fin a n cia l pla n n in g. Despite th is w ide
r a n ge of a ppa r en t pa r ticipa tion , in m a n y
ca ses tea ch er s fin d th a t, wh ile th ese com m ittees cr ea te a n illu sion of in volvem en t, th ey
ca n a ctu a lly im pede a n y r ea l tea ch er in flu en ce (Im ber a n d Du k e, 1984). Wh ile som e
tea ch er s a gr ee th a t, in som e ca ses, th e poten tia l ben efits of pa r ticipa tion m ay ou tweigh
th e costs of th eir in volvem en t, th ey (th e
tea ch er s) feel th a t th er e is little possibility of
th ese poten tia l ben efits bein g a ctu a lly
a ch ieved, u n less th eir level of pa r ticipa tion is
m a tch ed w ith a sim ila r level of in flu en ce over
th e fin a l decision ou tcom es (Du k e et a l., 1980).
A stu dy of devolu tion r efor m s in gover n m en t sch ools in Wester n Au str a lia su ggested
th a t th e ch a n ge to self-m a n a gem en t a n d
tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g
u sh er ed tea ch er s in to “a n ew r e gim e of
u n cer ta in ty” (Rober tson a n d Sou cek , 1991). In
th a t stu dy, tea ch er s spok e of secr ecy, politick in g a n d ba ck r oom ba r ga in in g. F in a n cia l
m a n a gem en t of sch ools w a s a n ew exper ien ce
for m ost, a n d tea ch er s dou bted th eir ow n
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
a bilities, a n d th e k n ow ledge a n d sk ills of
oth er s, in th is a r ea . Th e m a n a gem en t of
m on ey a n d th e power a n d con tr ol a ssocia ted
w ith it m ay cr ea te a n en vir on m en t in wh ich
th e de gr ee of com peten ce, in te gr ity, fa ir n ess
a n d open n ess of people a n d pr ocess a r e
in evita bly scr u tin ized.
It is th e exper ien ce of th e fir st a u th or in
pr esen tin g th e Ma ster ’s cou r se, “F in a n cia l
issu es in edu ca tion ”, a t th e Un iver sity of N ew
Sou th Wa les th a t tea ch er s often h ave a n
in h er en t dislik e of fin a n cia l m a tter s. Th is
dislik e m ay stem fr om a la ck of sk ills in th e
a r ea , fr om a su spicion th a t tea ch er em power m en t in fin a n cia l decision m a k in g is m er ely a
eu ph em ism for bu dgeta r y cu tba ck s, fr om a
con viction th a t su ch bu sin ess m a tter s
in tr u de in to tea ch er s’ pr ofession a l tim e, or
fr om a n expecta tion th a t tea ch er s w ill n ever
be told th e “fu ll stor y” con cer n in g th e
sch ool’s fin a n cia l situ a tion , a m on g oth er
possibilities.
In cir cu m sta n ces wh er e pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g is ba sed on fu ll disclosu r e of
in for m a tion , a n a bsen ce of per ceived bia s in
th e decision -m a k in g pr ocess a n d effective
im plem en ta tion of th e decision s r esu ltin g
fr om th e colla bor a tive pr ocess, r esea r ch h a s
sh ow n th a t in cr ea sed tr u st in th e sch ool’s
a dm in istr a tion often r esu lts (Con ley et a l.,
1988). However, in ca ses wh er e m isr epr esen ta tion of in for m a tion is u sed to m a n ipu la te
decision s (Ra sm u ssen a n d Roth stein , 1990) or
th er e is a n u n der lyin g a u th or ita r ia n
a ppr oa ch by pr in cipa ls despite a policy wh ich
pr ofesses dem ocr a tic in volvem en t of tea ch er s
(Br ow n , 1990; Kir by, 1992), r esen tm en t, a n ger
a n d a tota l la ck of con fiden ce in th e a dm in istr a tion often develop (Du k e et a l., 1980).
An y m isr epr esen ta tion , cir cu m ven tion or
fa ilu r e to disclose fi n a n cia l in for m a tion
pla ces tea ch er s in th e fr u str a tin g position of
bein g involved in th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocess bu t w ith vir tu a lly n o r ea l in flu en ce
over decision ou tcom es.
Som e stu dies (Du k e, 1978; Lor tie, 1975) su ggested th a t tea ch er s h ave little desir e to be
involved in decision m a k in g u n less it r ela tes
to cla ssr oom pr a ctice. In fa ct, Rober tson
fou n d th a t tea ch er s in volved in th e m a n a ger ia l a n d cor por a te life of th e sch ool r epor ted
a n u n der m in in g of th eir com m itm en t to th e
cla ssr oom . Oppor tu n ities for cu r r icu lu m
developm en t wer e sa id to be r edu ced, little
tim e w a s ava ila ble to con fer w ith collea gu es,
lesson pr epa r a tion w a s a ffected a n d in volvem en t w ith stu den ts ou tside th e cla ssr oom
w a s lim ited. Tea ch er s fou n d th a t th er e w a s
“little tim e for per son a l a n d pr ofession a l
r eflection for developin g a sen se of peda gogic
pu r pose” (Rober tson , 1993). Despite th ese
disin cen tives to tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in
fin a n cia l decision m a k in g, in a sch ool
en vir on m en t wh er e th er e is a per ceived la ck
of open n ess r e ga r din g fin a n cia l in for m a tion
a n d a belief th a t th er e m ay be in efficien t
m a n a gem en t of fu n ds a n d per ceived bia s in
th e a lloca tion of r esou r ces, it is lik ely th a t
tea ch er s w ill seek som e level of in volvem en t
in a n a ttem pt to secu r e efficien cy a n d equ ity
in r esou r ce a lloca tion .
Theory as a basis for best practice
Alth ou gh th er e h a s been con sider a ble
r esea r ch in to pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g in gen er a l, little h a s been don e specifica lly in th e a r ea of tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in
fin a n cia l decision m a k in g. Resea r ch er s
a ppea r to h ave com bin ed fin a n cia l issu es
w ith oth er decision issu es. At th e sa m e tim e,
edu ca tion a l a dm in istr a tor s seem r elu cta n t to
a ck n ow ledge th e n eed for a th eor etica l
a ppr oa ch to th e pr ocess of decision m a k in g,
feelin g th a t su ch a n a ppr oa ch wou ld be too
fa r r em oved fr om th e r ea lities of ever yday
pr a ctice (Bu sh , 1989). Bu sh r epor ts th a t m a n y
pr a ctition er s pr efer to fa ce th e ch a llen ges of
devolved fin a n cia l r espon sibility by a pplyin g
a “tr ia l a n d er r or ” a ppr oa ch r a th er th a n by
wor k in g w ith in a n esta blish ed set of th eor etica l gu idelin es. Th is a ppr oa ch is, of cou r se, a
for m of th eor izin g ba sed on “u n spok en
a ssu m ption s a n d u n r ecogn ized lim ita tion s”
(Hu gh es, 1986) a n d ten ds to pr odu ce a ver y
n a r r ow ou tlook on or ga n iza tion a l
pr ocedu r es. A cen tr a l pu r pose of th is pa per is
to pr opose a th eor etica l fr a m ewor k for
r esea r ch in th e a r ea of tea ch er in volvem en t
in fi n a n cia l decision m a k in g.
In con str u ctin g th e fr a m ewor k , th is pa per
is gu ided by th e th eor y developed th r ou gh th e
liter a tu r e on pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g
a n d or ga n iza tion a l ou tcom es. A deta iled
a n a lysis of th is liter a tu r e w ill a lso iden tify
specia l situ a tion a l fa ctor s th a t a ppea r to
a ffect tea ch er s’ a ttitu des tow a r ds pa r ticipa tion in fin a n cia l decision -m a k in g pr ocesses.
Relevant research
A n u m ber of th eor etica l m odels h ave been
u sed to expla in pa r ticipa tive decision -m a k in g
pr ocesses in sch ools (Ba ch a r a ch et a l., 1990;
Hoy a n d Misk el, 1991; Hoy a n d Ta r ter, 1993;
Moh r m a n et a l., 1978). Hoy a n d Ta r ter (1993)
expa n ded pr eviou s r esea r ch (Ba r n a r d, 1938;
Br idges, 1967; Hoy a n d Misk el, 1991; Sim on ,
1947) to develop a n or m a tive m odel of pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g in sch ools ba sed on
Sim on ’s zon e of a ccepta n ce. Th is zon e w a s
descr ibed a s th e r a n ge of decision a l issu es
w ith in wh ich su bor din a tes wou ld a ccept th e
decision s of th eir su per ior s. Th e zon e is con ceived a s a “two-dim en sion a l con str u ct
[ 95 ]
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
[ 96 ]
defin ed by r eleva n ce a n d exper tise” (Hoy a n d
Ta r ter, 1993, p. 5). Hoy a n d Ta r ter (1993) pr oposed th a t if tea ch er s h ave a per son a l sta k e in
th e issu e, a n d th e k n ow ledge to con tr ibu te,
th en th ey sh ou ld be in volved in th e decision m a k in g pr ocess. Th e exten t of th eir in volvem en t wou ld be deter m in ed by th e pr in cipa l’s
per ception of th eir com m itm en t to th e
or ga n iza tion a l goa ls of th e sch ool.
Th e Hoy a n d Ta r ter m odel a ssu m es th a t
pr in cipa ls deter m in e th e zon e of a ccepta n ce
for th eir tea ch er s (Rice a n d Sch n eider, 1992).
However, a dm in istr a tor s’ per ception s of th eir
ow n zon e of in flu en ce a r e gen er a lly gr ea ter
th a n th e tea ch er s’ per ception s of th eir zon e of
a ccepta n ce (Clea r a n d Sea ger, 1971). A
tea ch er ’s zon e of a ccepta n ce is n ot exter n a lly
deter m in ed. It is a n a m a lga m of per son a lity,
exper ien ces, r ole expecta tion s a n d va r iou s
situ a tion a l va r ia bles su ch a s a n in dividu a l’s
per ception of th e sch ool en vir on m en t a n d th e
sch ool’s a dm in istr a tor s.
Tea ch er s h ave been fou n d to r a te “tim e” a s
th e m a in deter r en t to in volvem en t in decision
m a k in g (Du k e et a l., 1980). Th er efor e, th e Hoy
a n d Ta r ter m odel fa ils to con sider situ a tion s
wh er e som e tea ch er s, even th ou gh exper tise
a n d r eleva n ce exist, pr efer to exten d th eir
zon e of a ccepta n ce a n d a llow cer ta in decision s to be m a de by oth er s. Su ch situ a tion s
cou ld r eflect a tea ch er ’s a bsolu te pr efer en ce
for th e cla ssr oom or cou ld r efl ect th e in flu en ce of situ a tion a l fa ctor s su ch a s decision
con ten t, open n ess of com m u n ica tion a n d
tr u st in th e a dm in istr a tion . In su ch cir cu m sta n ces “in dividu a ls m ay feel less str on gly
a bou t th e n eed to pa r ticipa te in th e decision m a k in g pr ocess” (Con ley et a l., 1988).
Th e con cept of decision con ten t is im por ta n t for a m or e com plete u n der sta n din g of
pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g a n d th e
a ssocia tion between th e in dividu a l a n d th e
pa r ticu la r decision issu e w a s in vestiga ted
(Moh r m a n et a l., 1978) u sin g P a r son ’s (1960)
fu n ction a l a n a lysis to iden tify two decision a l
dom a in s (tech n ica l a n d m a n a ger ia l). Th e
tech n ica l dom a in en com pa sses issu es
dir ectly r ela ted to th e per for m a n ce of th e
oper a tion a l fu n ction s of th e or ga n iza tion ; on e
of th e m a in pu r poses of th e m a n a ger ia l
dom a in is to pr ovide th e r esou r ces r equ ir ed
to su ppor t th e tech n ica l fu n ction . In th e stu dy
by Moh r m a n et a l. (1978) 12 decision a l a r ea s
(Alu tto a n d Bela sco, 1972) wer e u sed a n d
th ese, a s expected, fa ctor ed in to two decision
dom a in s. Th e fin a n cia l issu e “pla n n in g
sch ool bu dgets” w a s fou n d to fi t in th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in .
Usin g th is m u lti-dom a in a ppr oa ch ,
Moh r m a n et a l. (1978) fou n d th a t tea ch er s
r epor ted a h igh er level of a ctu a l a n d desir ed
involvem en t in th e tech n ica l dom a in th a n in
th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in . However, in appa r en t
con tr a diction , th eir level of desir ed in volvem en t in m a n a ger ia l decision m a k in g w a s
fou n d to be h igh er th a n th eir level of a ctu a l
involvem en t. In a ttem ptin g to expla in th is
a ppa r en t pa r a dox, th e r esea r ch er s pr oposed
th a t tea ch er s wer e m or e con cer n ed w ith th e
level of co-or din a tion between th e m a n a ger ia l
a n d tech n ica l dom a in s th a n w ith th eir dir ect
pa r ticipa tion in m a n a ger ia l decision m a k in g.
Th e difficu lty in clea r ly sepa r a tin g issu es
in to th e two dom a in s w a s a lso seen a s a possible expla n a tion for th e a n om a ly (Con ley,
1991). Tea ch er s’ desir e to in cr ea se th eir pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g in th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in m ay r eflect th eir la ck of tr u st in
th e decision m a k er s a n d th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocesses. Th eir in cr ea sed desir ed in volvem en t m ay be seen a s a “bu ffer ” a ga in st
a ttem pts by m a n a gem en t to r edu ce a n y in fl u en ce ga in ed by tea ch er s in th e in str u ction a l
a r ea . Tea ch er s m ay see th eir in volvem en t in
m a n a ger ia l decision m a k in g to be n ecessa r y
to sa fe gu a r d th eir in flu en ce over cla ssr oom
pr a ctice, r a th er th a n for a n y in tr in sica lly
wor th wh ile pu r pose (Moh r m a n et a l., 1978;
Th om pson , 1967). Th eir r ea ction s m ay a lso
stem fr om a per ception th a t a dm in istr a tor s
fr equ en tly per ceive pa r ticipa tion a s som eth in g a ltr u istica lly bestowed on tea ch er s
(Con ley et a l., 1988), r a th er th a n a s a pr ofession a l con tr ibu tion by tea ch er s. Th ese r esu lts
a r e gen er a lly con sisten t w ith oth er fin din gs
(Ba ch a r a ch et a l., 1990; Sch n eider, 1984).
Befor e in fer en ces con cer n in g tea ch er s’
desir ed in volvem en t in fin a n cia l decision
m a k in g a r e dr aw n fr om th e wor k of
Moh r m a n et a l. (1978), con sider a tion sh ou ld
be given to th e n a tu r e of th e pa r ticu la r decision a l issu es in th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in . In
th is r esea r ch (Moh r m a n et a l., 1978) th e fin a n cia l decision issu e “pla n n in g sch ool bu dgets”
w a s n ot descr ibed in su fficien t deta il for
pa r ticipa n ts in th e r esea r ch to a scer ta in
wh eth er “sch ool bu dgets” r efer r ed to “wh ole
sch ool” r esou r ce a lloca tion , or a lloca tion
w ith in a pa r ticu la r tea ch in g a r ea , or a com bin a tion of th e two. Beca u se of th is, it is n ot
possible to decide wh eth er th is fin a n cia l
decision issu e lies in th e m a n a ger ia l or in th e
tech n ica l dom a in . Ba ch a r a ch et a l. (1990)
exten ded th e decision a l dom a in s pr oposed by
Moh r m a n et a l. (1978) a n d iden tified decision
issu es ba sed on th e con cept of oper a tion a l
(tech n ica l) a n d str a te gic (m a n a ger ia l)
dom a in s, a n d wh eth er th e pa r ticu la r issu e
h a d a dir ect effect on th e in dividu a l or th e
or ga n iza tion . Th ese two dim en sion s gen er a ted fou r decision a l dom a in s. Usin g th is
cla ssifica tion , “wh ole sch ool bu dgetin g”
wou ld lie in th e str a te gic (m a n a ger ia l)/ or ga n isa tion a l dom a in , wh ile “bu dgetin g for
specific tea ch in g a r ea s” wou ld be in th e
str a te gic (m a n a ger ia l)/ in dividu a l dom a in . In
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
th e stu dy, 19 decision item s wer e u sed a n d
wer e fou n d to fa ctor in to th e fou r decision a l
dom a in s of th e con ceptu a l fr a m ewor k . F in a n cia l issu es wer e a ga in clu ster ed u n der th e
gen er a l h ea din gs of fa cilities pla n n in g, bu dget developm en t a n d expen ditu r e pr ior ities
a n d wer e fa ctor ed in to th e str a te gicor ga n iza tion a l dom a in . F in din gs sh owed th a t
decision a l depr iva tion in th e str a te gicor ga n iza tion a l dom a in w a s n e ga tively r ela ted
to job sa tisfa ction a n d w a s m or e a ppa r en t in
secon da r y th a n in pr im a r y sch ools. Th is
r esu lt w a s expla in ed by th e fa ct th a t
secon da r y tea ch er s wor k in a m or e com plex,
decen tr a lized en vir on m en t th a n pr im a r y
tea ch er s a n d a r e m or e aw a r e of depr iva tion
in r esou r ce a lloca tion a n d oth er fi n a n cia l
issu es, th er eby decr ea sin g th eir job sa tisfa ction . Wh ile th is r esea r ch (Ba ch a r a ch et a l.,
1990) in volved m or e fi n a n cia l issu es th a n
pr eviou s stu dies, it did n ot clea r ly iden tify
th em a s poten tia lly h avin g a dir ect or in dir ect effect on in str u ction a l a ctivities.
Rice a n d Sch n eider (1992) r eplica ted a stu dy
ca r r ied ou t by Th ier ba ch in 1980 a n d r epor ted
in Sch n eider (1984). Th ey sou gh t to deter m in e
wh eth er a deca de of r efor m in th e a r ea of
tea ch er em power m en t h a d sign ifica n tly
ch a n ged tea ch er s’ levels of decision a l pa r ticipa tion , sa tisfa ction w ith decision -m a k in g
pr ocesses a n d in ter est a n d exper tise in decision a l issu es. Th e stu dy specifica lly con sider ed wh eth er tea ch er s’ in ter ests in tech n ica l
a n d m a n a ger ia l issu es h a d ch a n ged over
tim e. F a ctor a n a lysis w a s a pplied to 20 decision a l issu es, dividin g th em in to two
dom a in s, in str u ction / tech n ica l a n d sch oolw ide/ m a n a ger ia l. Th is stu dy clea r ly iden tified two fin a n cia l issu es con ta in ed in th e
listin g of decision issu es. “P r epa r in g su bject
depa r tm en t or in str u ction a l tea m bu dgets”
w a s fou n d in th e in str u ction a l/ tech n ica l
dom a in , wh ile “a lloca tin g m a ter ia ls a n d
equ ipm en t to su bject depa r tm en ts or tea m s”
w a s loca ted in th e sch oolw ide/ m a n a ger ia l
dom a in . A clea r distin ction w a s m a de
between fin a n cia l issu es dir ectly a ssocia ted
w ith in str u ction a l a ctivities a n d th ose
r ela ted m or e to sch oolw ide pr ocedu r es.
Resu lts fr om th e stu dy in dica ted th a t despite
ten yea r s of a tten tion to tea ch er em power m en t, tea ch er s con tin u ed to desir e m or e
pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g th a n th ey
a r e cu r r en tly a ffor ded. Th e r eplica ted stu dy
sh owed, a s did th e or igin a l stu dy, th a t tea ch er s r epor ted low levels of a ctu a l in volvem en t
a n d h igh er levels of desir ed in volvem en t in
m a n a ger ia l/ sch oolw ide issu es. Wh ile tea ch er s con tin u ed to r epor t h igh er levels of decision a l depr iva tion in m a n a ger ia l issu es th a n
in in str u ction a l issu es, a n oticea ble tr en d h a d
em er ged w ith fi n a n cia l decision a l issu es.
Bu dgetin g, dir ectly r ela ted to cla ssr oom
a ctivities, r epor ted th e secon d h igh est level of
depr iva tion in th e tech n ica l dom a in , wh ile
sch oolw ide r esou r ce a lloca tion w a s on e of th e
lowest r epor ted levels of depr iva tion in th e
m a n a ger ia l dom a in . It is im por ta n t to n ote
th a t th e in cr ea se in em ph a sis on fi n a n cia l
issu es coin cides w ith a globa l tr en d to decen tr a lize fi n a n cia l decision s to th e poin t of
deliver y of th e edu ca tion a l ser vice. Th e m a in
deliver y poin t for th ese ser vices is th e cla ssr oom ; h en ce it is vita l th a t r eleva n t tech n ica l
decision s a r e tr u ly devolved to th is level a n d
n ot m er ely r e-cen tr a lized in th e pr in cipa l a n d
a sm a ll n u m ber of execu tive sta ff.
Alth ou gh a n a n a lysis of th e r esea r ch liter a tu r e on tea ch er in volvem en t in decision m a k in g h a s u n cover ed n o deta iled em pir ica l stu dies in to tea ch er s’ pa r ticipa tion in fin a n cia l
decision m a k in g, it h a s r a ised a n u m ber of
sign ifica n t qu estion s. Ca n fin a n cia l issu es be
ca te gor ized in to tech n ica l a n d m a n a ger ia l
dom a in s? Do tea ch er s w a n t to be in volved in
fin a n cia l decision m a k in g in th e tech n ica l
dom a in ? Wh a t fa ctor s a ffect tea ch er s’ a ttitu des tow a r ds pa r ticipa tion in gen er a l decision m a k in g in th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in ? Do
tea ch er s feel th eir level of in flu en ce in deter m in in g decision ou tcom es is com m en su r a te
w ith th eir level of in volvem en t in th e decision -m a k in g pr ocess?
In con sider in g th ese qu estion s a n u m ber of
poin ts em er ge. Tea ch er s m ay h ave a pr efer en ce for in volvem en t in decision m a k in g th a t
dir ectly a ffects th eir cla ssr oom pr a ctice
(Ba ch u s, 1992; Br idges, 1967; Du k e, 1978;
Lor tie, 1975); fu ll disclosu r e of a ll fin a n cia l
in for m a tion is r e ga r ded by tea ch er s a s essen tia l for effective fi n a n cia l decision m a k in g
(Ha r tm a n , 1985); a n d effective decision m a k in g in fi n a n cia l m a n a gem en t r elies on a clim a te of tr u st, open n ess a n d m u tu a l ben efit
(Ca ldwell a n d Misko, 1984).
Oth er stu dies (Ba ch u s, 1992; Moh r m a n et
a l., 1978; Rice a n d Sch n eider, 1992) h ave
r evea led th a t tea ch er s r epor ted h igh er levels
of depr iva tion r e ga r din g m a n a ger ia l or
sch oolw ide issu es. Th is a ppa r en tly pa r a doxica l situ a tion , wh er e tea ch er s h ave in dica ted a
desir e for gr ea ter pa r ticipa tion in a n a r ea in
wh ich th ey der ive little sa tisfa ction , h a s been
a ddr essed by a n u m ber of r esea r ch er s
(Con ley, 1989; Moh r m a n et a l., 1978;
Th om pson , 1967). It w a s pa r tly expla in ed by
F r a se a n d Sor en son in ter m s of som e tea ch er s h avin g “h igh gr ow th n eeds” (1992, p. 40).
Th a t is, su ch tea ch er s m ay h ave a str on g
desir e for pr ofession a l gr ow th a n d in or der to
a ch ieve job sa tisfa ction r equ ir e in volvem en t
in sh a r ed decision -m a k in g str u ctu r es (F a r ber
a n d Miller, 1982). Som e of th ese tea ch er s w ill,
u n dou btedly, h ave m a n a ger ia l a spir a tion s
a n d w ill con sider in volvem en t a n d exper ien ce in fi n a n cia l a n d n on -fin a n cia l
[ 97 ]
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
m a n a gem en t issu es essen tia l to fu tu r e ca r eer
oppor tu n ities. Th er e is n o pa r a dox for th ese
tea ch er s. Th ey desir e to be in volved a n d w ill
a ch ieve sa tisfa ction fr om th eir in volvem en t.
N ot a ll tea ch er s desir e a dva n cem en t in th e
m a n a ger ia l sector ; som e see even a low level
of in volvem en t in fi n a n cia l decision m a k in g
in n on -tech n ica l or m a n a ger ia l issu es a s
detr a ctin g fr om va lu a ble cla ssr oom tim e.
Th ey view m a n a ger ia l fin a n cia l decision
m a k in g on ly in ter m s of a m ech a n ism for
deliver in g decision ou tcom es su ppor tive of
th eir tea ch in g a ctivities. If th e situ a tion a l
con dition s n ecessa r y for th is m ech a n ism to
wor k effectively a r e per ceived by tea ch er s to
be in pla ce, th en th eir desir e to be in volved in
th e pr ocess is lik ely to decr ea se. If tea ch er s
ju dge th e decision ou tcom es to be
in equ ita ble, ill-con ceived a n d n ot su ppor tive
of th eir tea ch in g effor ts th en th ey w ill feel it
n ecessa r y to be in volved. A m a jor situ a tion a l
va r ia ble a ssocia ted w ith th ese con dition s is
con ceptu a lized a s “or ga n iza tion a l tr u st”
(Ga m son , 1968).
The concept of trust and financial
decision making
In a stu dy by Alu tto a n d Bela sco (1972), tr u st,
con ceived a s tea ch er s’ per ception s of th e
fr ien dlin ess or oth er w ise of th eir socia l en vir on m en t, w a s n ot fou n d to be sign ifica n tly
a ssocia ted w ith va r yin g levels of sa tisfa ction .
Th is r esu lt w a s con tr a r y to th e ea r lier wor k
of Ben n is (1967) wh o fou n d th a t h igh er levels
of job sa tisfa ction wer e a ssocia ted w ith
in cr ea sed tr u st. Both stu dies wer e lim ited by
sm a ll sa m ples a n d both defin ed tr u st fr om a
per son a l r a th er th a n or ga n iza tion a l per spective.
Som e r esea r ch er s per ceived tr u st a s a
globa l per son a lity tr a it (Rosen ber g, 1956;
Rotter, 1971) wh ile oth er s (Ga m son , 1968)
con sider ed it fr om a n or ga n iza tion a l or ien ta tion . Or ga n iza tion a l tr u st is defi n ed a s th e
pr oba bility th a t cer ta in decision ou tcom es,
pr efer r ed by a n in dividu a l or gr ou p, w ill
r esu lt w ith ou t th e in volvem en t of th a t in dividu a l or gr ou p in th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocess. It is a r gu ed th a t or ga n iza tion a l tr u st
is th e m a jor deter m in a n t of a n in dividu a l’s
or ien ta tion tow a r ds th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocesses of th e or ga n iza tion . In Ga m son ’s
(1968) stu dy, or ga n iza tion a l tr u st w a s str on gly
r ela ted both to over a ll sa tisfa ction a n d to
sa tisfa ction w ith in volvem en t in decision
m a k in g, wh ile per son a l tr u st fa iled to pr edict
su ch a ssocia tion s.
Ga m son ’s con cept of tr u st w a s descr ibed by
Dr iscoll (1978) a s a politica l a ssessm en t of a n
or ga n iza tion ’s decision m a k er s. He fou n d th a t,
r ega r dless of th e r ela tion sh ip between a ctu a l
[ 98 ]
a n d desir ed pa r ticipa tion , tea ch er s w ith a
gr ea ter degr ee of tr u st in h ier a r ch ica l decision m a ker s wer e m or e sa tisfied w ith th eir
level of pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g.
Tr u st, iden tified a s in ter per son a l or dya dic
tr u st, m ay a lso be con ceived a s a globa l m ea su r e of tea ch er s’ per ception s of th e decision
m a k er s or th e decision -m a k in g pr ocesses
(Scott, 1980). Resea r ch er s (Bu tler a n d
Ca n tr ell, 1984; Rober ts a n d O’Reilly, 1974;
Tya gi, 1985) h ave u sed th e m u lti-dim en sion a l
n a tu r e of tr u st, a s explor ed by J en n in gs (1971)
a n d Ga ba r r o (1978), to deter m in e a m ea su r e
of dya dic tr u st. Th e dim en sion s u sed
in clu ded in te gr ity, com peten ce, con sisten cy,
loya lty, fa ir n ess a n d open n ess.
Tr u st, in a fin a n cia l con text, m ay be con ceptu a lized in ter m s of both or ga n iza tion a l
a n d dya dic tr u st. Th is tr u st ca n be con ceived
a s tea ch er s’ per ception s of: th e in te gr ity of
th e decision m a k er s a n d th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocesses; th e exper tise of th e decision
m a k er s a n d th e effectiven ess of th e decision m a k in g pr ocesses; th e con sisten cy of th e
decision ou tcom es, th e de gr ee of fa ir n ess of
th e decision ou tcom es; a n d th e de gr ee of
disclosu r e of fi n a n cia l in for m a tion .
If tea ch er s a r e wor k in g in a n en vir on m en t
wh er e th er e is fu ll disclosu r e of fi n a n cia l
in for m a tion , a n d wh er e th ey per ceive th a t
u n bia sed decision s a r e m a de by decision
m a k er s sk illed in th e pa r ticu la r fin a n cia l
decision a r ea , th en th eir level of tr u st w ill be
h igh . Stu dies (Du k e et a l., 1980) h ave sh ow n
th a t tea ch er s a r e well aw a r e of th e costs a s
well a s th e ben efits a ssocia ted w ith pa r ticipa tion in a n y for m of decision m a k in g. Th u s, if
tr u st in th e sch ool’s fin a n cia l decision
m a k er s a n d decision -m a k in g pr ocesses is
h igh , tea ch er s m ay, th r ou gh a sim ple costben efit a n a lysis, be ver y selective wh en deter m in in g th e n a tu r e of th e fin a n cia l decision
issu es w ith wh ich th ey w ill becom e in volved.
Th eir focu s w ill a lm ost cer ta in ly th en be on
th ose decision s m or e dir ectly a ffectin g th eir
wor k a s tea ch er s.
A conceptual framework
An a n a lysis of r eleva n t r esea r ch liter a tu r e in
th e a r ea of tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in decision
m a k in g a n d th e con cepts of or ga n iza tion a l
a n d dya dic tr u st m ay be u sed to develop a
th eor etica l fr a m ewor k for tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g in a fin a n cia l con text.
F in a n cia l decision s ca n be a lloca ted in to
two distin ct dom a in s: th e tech n ica l dom a in ,
wh ich en com pa sses issu es dir ectly r ela ted to
in str u ction a l or cla ssr oom fu n ction s, a n d th e
m a n a ger ia l dom a in , wh ich pr ovides sch oolw ide su ppor t for th e in str u ction a l a ctivities.
Tea ch er s h ave a gr ea ter desir e to in flu en ce
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
decision s per ta in in g dir ectly to in str u ction a l
m a tter s th a n to in flu en ce decision s r ela tin g
to m a n a ger ia l issu es (Du k e, 1978; Lor tie,
1975). Th eir desir ed pa r ticipa tion in th e m a n a ger ia l dom a in depen ds on th eir per ception s
of th e fin a n cia l decision -m a k in g pr ocesses
a n d of fin a n cia l decision m a k er s. An im por ta n t situ a tion a l va r ia ble a ffectin g th ese per ception s h a s been iden tified a s or ga n iza tion a l
a n d dya dic tr u st (tr u st). Tr u st h a s been con ceptu a lized in ter m s of th e in te gr ity, con sisten cy a n d fa ir n ess of th e decision m a k er s a n d
th e decision -m a k in g pr ocesses; th e exper tise
of th e decision m a k er s, th e effectiven ess of
th e pr ocesses a n d th e de gr ee of disclosu r e of
fin a n cia l in for m a tion .
Practical implications for schools
Th is pa per h a s con sider ed pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g fr om a th eor etica l per spective.
In or der to dr aw som e pr a ctica l str a te gies
fr om th e con ceptu a l fr a m ewor k pr esen ted, it
is n ecessa r y fi r st to view pa r ticipa tive fin a n cia l decision m a k in g in th e over a ll con text of
th e fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t of sch ools.
If sch ools a r e to cr ea te wor k in g en vir on m en ts for tea ch er s ba sed on tr u st, th en a
n u m ber of issu es, both in ter n a l a n d exter n a l
to sch ools, m u st fi r st be a ddr essed. Som e of
th ese issu es a r e beyon d th e scope of th is
pa per. Th ey in clu de a r eview of th e w ay
sch ools a r e fu n ded, ba sed on equ ity con sider a tion s; cla r ifi ca tion of th e r ole of th e sch ool
cou n cil in th e fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t of th e
sch ool; deter m in a tion of th e r ole of th e pr in cipa l, be it fin a n cia l m a n a ger, edu ca tion a l
lea der or a com bin a tion of both ; tr a in in g of
k ey per son n el (on e or two) in fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t of sch ools; a n d a ba sic level of tr a in in g for cost cen tr e m a n a ger s (su bject coor din a tor s a n d th e lik e) in th e a r ea s of str a tegic m a n a gem en t pr ocesses, bu dgetin g, n e gotia tion a n d tea m wor k .
On ce th ese issu es a r e r esolved, it is possible
to esta blish a n en vir on m en t of tr u st th r ou gh
th e im plem en ta tion of str u ctu r es a n d
pr ocesses ba sed on in te gr ity, open n ess, con sisten cy, fa ir n ess a n d a pr ofession a l a ppr oa ch
to fin a n cia l decision m a k in g. Th ese pr ocesses
m u st clea r ly distin gu ish between th e fin a n cia l issu es a ssocia ted w ith th e tech n ica l
a spects a n d th ose a ssocia ted w ith th e m a n a ger ia l a spects of sch ools. Th is w ill give
tea ch er s a n oppor tu n ity to m in im ize th eir
involvem en t in fi n a n cia l issu es r ela tin g to th e
m a n a ger ia l or cor por a te life of th e sch ool a n d
to con cen tr a te th eir effor ts on a com m itm en t
to cla ssr oom pr a ctice a n d to th eir stu den ts.
A financial decision-making model
Th e follow in g m odel is su ggested for a sch ool
wh er e th e m a n a gem en t ph ilosoph y is ba sed
on th e con cept of tr u st a s con ceptu a lized in
th is pa per. Th e m odel a ssu m es th a t th e u ltim a te r espon sibility for th e fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t of th e sch ool r ests w ith th e ch ief
execu tive officer (CE O) of th e sch ool (tr a dition a lly th e pr in cipa l, a lth ou gh th is n eed n ot
be th e ca se). Th e sch ool cou n cil is th e m a in
gover n in g body of th e sch ool. Th e cou n cil is
a ssisted by th e CE O a n d u su a lly com pr ises
r epr esen ta tives of th e sch ool com m u n ity,
in clu din g tea ch er s a n d in som e
cir cu m sta n ces sen ior stu den ts. A sta ff
fin a n ce com m ittee (SF C) pr epa r es th e bu dget
wor k pa per s a n d a dvises th e CE O on a ll fin a n cia l m a tter s. Th is com m ittee sh ou ld con sist
of two or th r ee m em ber s of th e sta ff wh o h ave
r eceived in ten sive tr a in in g in fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t of sch ools. In som e ca ses th e pr in cipa l m ay be a m em ber of th is com m ittee. Mem ber sh ip of th e SF C sh ou ld be a ck n ow ledged
by a per iod a llow a n ce a n d/ or by a m on eta r y
a llow a n ce.
Th e m a in fu n ction s of th e SF C a r e: to estim a te th e sch ool’s a n n u a l r even u e; to pr ovide
r eleva n t in for m a tion to a ll cost cen tr e m a n a ger s (m a n a ger ia l a n d tech n ica l) in or der to
a ssist th em w ith th eir bu dget su bm ission s; to
colla te bu dget in for m a tion fr om a ll cost cen tr es; a n d to pr epa r e wor k docu m en ts for th e
bu dget wor k gr ou p (BWG). Th ese docu m en ts
deta il a ll a n ticipa ted r even u e a n d pr oposed
bu dgets for a ll m a n a ger ia l a n d tech n ica l cost
cen tr es. Th e BWG u su a lly com pr ises th e CE O
(a ssu m ed to be th e pr in cipa l), a r epr esen ta tive fr om th e SF C a n d a ll cost cen tr e m a n a ger s, a n d m eets to decide on r equ ir ed expen ditu r e cu ts in ca ses wh er e th e tota l of th e
expen ses fr om a ll cost cen tr es exceeds th e
a n ticipa ted r even u e of th e sch ool. Th e SF C
does n ot h ave a decision -m a k in g r ole; it a cts
a s a secr eta r ia t to th e BWG a n d sh ou ld be
seen a s a n u n bia sed collator a n d distr ibu tor of
in for m a tion . Th e SF C pr epa r es th e fin a l bu dget a n d for w a r ds it to th e CE O for pr esen ta tion to a n d r a tifica tion by th e sch ool cou n cil.
Th e flow ch a r t in F igu r e 1 illu str a tes th e
decision -m a k in g sequ en ce wh ich occu r s in
th e a r ea of fin a n cia l m a n a gem en t. It is im por ta n t to n ote th a t th e on ly in volvem en t of
cla ssr oom tea ch er s in fin a n cia l decision
m a k in g is wh en th ey m eet w ith th eir cost
cen tr e gr ou ps to pr epa r e a n d pr ior itize th eir
r esou r ce r equ ir em en ts for th e com in g yea r.
Th e de gr ee of tr u st a ssocia ted w ith th e
im plem en ta tion of th e m odel depen ds, to a
la r ge exten t, on th e policies u n der pin n in g th e
str u ctu r e a n d pr ocesses a n d on th e w ay th e
pa r ticipa n ts in th e decision m a k in g per ceive
a n d ca r r y ou t th eir r oles. Th e sch ool cou n cil,
th r ou gh th e pr in cipa l a n d th e SF C, m u st h ave
a policy of fu ll disclosu r e of a ll fin a n cia l in for m a tion (Ha r tm a n , 1985). Mon th ly ca sh flow
sta tem en ts a n d ca sh position r epor ts, a fter
r a tifica tion by th e sch ool cou n cil, sh ou ld be
[ 99 ]
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
m a de ava ila ble to a ll cost cen tr e m a n a ger s
a n d th eir tea m s.
P a r ticipa n ts in th e pr ocess n eed to be
a cu tely aw a r e of th eir r oles a n d r espon sibilities. Th e pr in cipa l’s m a in r ole is to en su r e
th a t decision s a r e a lw ays m a de w ith in th e
br oa d fr a m ewor k of sch ool n eeds (esta blish ed
in th e m ission sta tem en t) a n d th e policies of
a n y exter n a l a u th or ity. Th e pr in cipa l sh ou ld
tr y to m in im ize a n y self-ser vin g beh aviou r
fr om cost cen tr e m a n a ger s (Du ign a n , 1990), to
h igh ligh t a n y obviou s im ba la n ces in th e
a lloca tion of r esou r ces a n d to fa cilita te cor dia l r ela tion s w ith in th e gr ou p. Cost cen tr e
m a n a ger s h ave a cr itica l r ole in th e pr ocess.
Th ey m u st en th u sia stica lly pu r su e th e
r esou r ces r equ ir ed to im plem en t th eir tea m ’s
a ca dem ic goa ls, wh ile bein g m in dfu l of th e
over a ll n eeds of th e sch ool. Th ey m u st u n der sta n d th e im plicit r u les of th e pr ocess a n d
avoid a m bit r equ ests a n d cla im s a bou t th e
dir e con sequ en ces th a t w ill r esu lt sh ou ld
cla im a n ts be den ied a pa r ticu la r bu dget
r equ est. Cost cen tr e m a n a ger s sh ou ld h ave a
th or ou gh u n der sta n din g of th e com plete
fin a n cia l decision -m a k in g pr ocess a n d,
th r ou gh th eir beh aviou r a n d com m en t, h elp
to convey to a ll sta ff th e in te gr ity a n d effectiven ess of th e pr ocess.
If th e pr ocess is per ceived by tea ch er s to be
effective, open a n d fa ir, it w ill h elp to a llay th e
su spicion s a n d u n cer ta in ties com m on ly a ssocia ted w ith fi n a n cia l decision m a k in g. P a r ticipa tion a t a ll levels in th e pr ocess (fr om tea m
m em ber to m a n a ger ) develops a sen se of
com m itm en t, coh esion a n d con fi den ce a m on g
sta ff. Th r ou gh th e cost cen tr e m a n a ger s,
tea ch er s w ill obta in a wh ole-sch ool view of
th e r esou r ce n eeds a n d pr ior ities. Cost cen tr e
Figure 1
Financ ial de c isio n-making mo de l
[ 100 ]
m a n a ger s w ill h ave a vested in ter est in
r esou r ce a lloca tion decision s bein g a ccepted
by th eir tea m (Ha r tm a n , 1985).
Th e pr ocess w ill gr ea tly r edu ce th e n eed for
th e m a jor ity of tea ch er s to be in volved in
m a n a ger ia l fin a n cia l issu es a n d w ill m in im ize tea ch er s’ in volvem en t in fin a n cia l
issu es in th e tech n ica l dom a in . Th is, in tu r n ,
sh ou ld h ave a positive im pa ct on cla ssr oom
pr a ctice.
References
Alu tto, J .A. a n d Bela sco, J .A. (1972), “P a tter n s of
tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in sch ool system decision m a k in g”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion
Qu a r terly, Vol. 9 N o. 1, pp. 27-41.
Ba ch a r a ch , S.B., Ba m ber ger, P., Con ley, S.C. a n d
Ba u er, S. (1990), “Th e dim en sion a lity of decision pa r ticipa tion in edu ca tion a l or ga n isa tion s; th e va lu e of m u lti-dom a in eva lu a tive
a ppr oa ch ”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion Qu a r terly, Vol. 26 N o. 2, pp. 126-67.
Ba ch u s, G. (1992), “Sch ool ba sed m a n a gem en t: do
tea ch er s w a n t m or e in volvem en t in decision
m a k in g?”, Ru ral Edu cator, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-4.
Ba r n a r d, C. (1938), T h e Fu n ction s of th e Ex ecu tiv e,
Ha r va r d Un iver sity P r ess, Ca m br idge, MA.
Ben n is, W. (1967), “Beyon d bu r ea u cr a cy”, in
Holla n der, E . a n d Hu n t, R. (E ds), Cu r ren t
Perspectiv es in S ocia l Psych olog y (2n d ed.),
Oxfor d Un iver sity P r ess, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Br idges, E .M. (1967), “A m odel for sh a r ed decision
m a k in g in th e sch ool pr in cipa lsh ip”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion Qu a r terly, Vol. 3 N o. 1,
pp. 49-61.
Br ow n , D.J . (1990), Decen tra lisa tion a n d S ch ool
B a sed M a n a gem en t, F a lm er P r ess, Lewes.
Bu sh , T. (1989), “Th e n a tu r e of th eor y in edu ca tion a l m a n a gem en t”, in Bu sh , T. (E d.), M a n a gin g Ed u ca tion : T h eor y a n d Pra ctice, Open
Un iver sity P r ess, Milton Keyn es.
Bu tler, J .K. a n d Ca n tr ell, R.S. (1984), “A beh avior a l
decision th eor y a ppr oa ch to m odellin g dya dic
tr u st in su per ior s a n d su bor din a tes”, Psych ologica l R epor ts, Vol. 55, pp. 19-28.
Ca ldwell, B. a n d Misko, J . (1984), “Sch ool-ba sed
bu dgetin g: a fi n a n cia l str a te gy for m eetin g
th e n eeds of stu den ts”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion R eview , Vol. 2 N o. 1, pp. 29-59.
Clea r, D.K. a n d Sea ger, R.C. (1971), “Th e le gitim a cy of a dm in istr a tive in fl u en ce a s per ceived
by selected gr ou ps”, Ed u ca tion a l a n d Ur b a n
S ociety, Vol. 21 N o. 4, pp. 366-79.
Con ley, S. (1989), “Wh o’s on fir st? Sch ool r efor m ,
tea ch er pa r ticipa tion a n d th e decision -m a k in g
pr ocess”, Ed u ca tion a n d Ur b a n S ociety,
Vol. 21 N o. 4, pp. 366-79.
Con ley, S. (1991), “Review of r esea r ch on tea ch er
pa r ticipa tion in sch ool decision m a k in g”, in
Br a n t, D. (E d.), R eview of R esea rch in Ed u ca tion , Am er ica n E du ca tion a l Resea r ch Associa tion , Wa sh in gton , DC.
Con ley, S., Sch m idle, T. a n d Sh edd. J . (1988),
“Tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in th e m a n a gem en t of
sch ool system s”, T ea ch ers College R ecord,
Vol. 90 N o. 2, pp. 232, 259-80.
Ge o ffre y Ne wc o mbe ,
Jo hn Mc Co rmic k and
Fe nto n Sharpe
Financ ial de c isio n making:
te ac he r invo lve me nt and the
ne e d fo r trust
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 3 [1 9 9 7 ] 9 4 –1 0 1
Con w ay, J .A. (1984), “Th e m yth , m yster y, a n d
m a ster y of pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g in
edu ca tion ”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion
Qu a r terly, Vol. 20 N o. 30, pp. 11-39.
Dr iscoll, J . (1978), “Tr u st a n d pa r ticipa tion in
or ga n isa tion a l decision m a k in g a s pr edictor s
of sa tisfa ction ”, A ca d em y of M a n a gem en t
J ou r n a l, Vol. 21 N o. 1, pp. 44-56.
Du ign a n , P.A. (1990), “Sch ool-ba sed decision
m a k in g a n d m a n a gem en t: r etr ospect a n d
pr ospect”, in Ch a pm a n , J . (E d.), S ch ool-b a sed
Decision m a k in g a n d M a n a gem en t, Th e
F a lm er P r ess, Lon don .
Du k e, D. (1978), “Tow a r d r espon sible in n ova tion ”,
T h e Ed u ca tion a l Foru m , Vol. 42, pp. 351-72.
Du k e, D.L., Sh ower s, B.K. a n d Im ber, M. (1980),
“Tea ch er s a n d sh a r ed decision m a k in g: th e
costs a n d ben efi ts of in volvem en t”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion Qu a r terly, Vol. 16 N o. 1,
Win ter, pp. 93-106.
F a r ber, A. a n d Miller, J . (1982), “Tea ch er bu r n ou t:
P sych oedu ca tion a l per spective”, T h e Ed u ca tion Digest, Septem ber.
F r a se, L. a n d Sor en son , L. (1992), “Tea ch er m otiva tion a n d sa tisfa ction : im pa ct on pa r ticipa tor y m a n a gem en t”, N A S S P B u lletin ,
(N a tion a l Appr ecia tion of Secon da r y Sch ool
P r in cipa ls), Vol. 76 N o. 540, pp. 37-43.
Ga ba r r o, J .J . (1978), “Th e developm en t of tr u st,
in fl u en ce a n d expecta tion s”, in Ath os, A. a n d
Ga ba r r o, J .J . (E ds), In terperson a l B eh a vior:
Com m u n ica tion a n d Un d ersta n d in g in R ela tion sh ips, P r en tice-Ha ll, E n glewood Cliffs, N J .
Ga m son , W.A. (1968), Pow er a n d Discon ten t,
Dor sey, Hom ewood, IL.
Ha r tm a n , W. (1985), “P a r ticipa tor y bu dgetin g in
h igh sch ool”, Pla n n in g a n d Ch a n ge, pp. 15-25.
Hoy, W.K. a n d Misk el, C.G. (1991), Ed u ca tion a l
A d m in istra tion : T h eor y, R esea rch a n d
Pra ctice, Ra n dom Hou se, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Hoy, W.K. a n d Ta r ter, C. (1993), “A n or m a tive
th eor y of pa r ticipa tive decision m a k in g in
sch ools”, J ou r n a l of Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion , Vol. 31 N o. 3.
Hu gh es, M. (1986), “Th eor y a n d pr a ctice in edu ca tion a l m a n a gem en t”, in Hu gh es, M., Robbin s,
P. a n d Th om a s, H. (E ds), M a n a gin g Ed u ca tion :
T h e S ystem a n d th e In stitu tion , Holt Rin eh a r t
a n d Win ston , Lon don , p. 31.
Im ber, M. a n d Du k e, D.L. (1984), “Tea ch er pa r ticipa tion in sch ool decision m a k in g: a fr a m ewor k for r esea r ch ”, J ou r n a l of Ed u ca tion a l
A d m in istra tion , Vol. 33, pp. 24-34.
J en n in gs, E .E . (1971), R ou tes to th e Ex ecu tiv e S u ite,
McGr aw -Hill, N ew Yor k , N Y.
J on es, D. (1989), “P r ogr a m m e bu dgetin g for colle ges”, in Leva cic, R. (E d.), Fin a n cia l M a n a gem en t in Ed u ca tion , Open Un iver sity P r ess,
Milton Keyn es.
Kir by, P. (1992), “Tea ch er em power m en t depen ds
on n eeds, expecta tion s of pr in cipa ls, sch ools,
distr icts”, N A S S P B u lletin , Vol. 76 N o. 540,
pp. 89-95.
Kn igh t, B. (1993), “Dele ga ted fi n a n cia l m a n a gem en t a n d sch ool effectiven ess”, in Dim m ock ,
C. (E d.), S ch ool-B a sed M a n a gem en t a n d
S ch ool Effectiv en ess, Rou tledge, Lon don .
Lor tie, D. (1975), S ch ool T ea ch er, Un iver sity of
Ch ica go P r ess, Ch ica go, IL.
Moh r m a n , A.M. J r, Cook e, R.A. a n d Moh r m a n ,
S.A. (1978), “P a r ticipa tion in decision m a k in g:
a m u lti-dim en sion a l per spective”, Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion Qu a r terly, Vol. 14 N o. 1,
pp. 13-19.
P a r son s, T. (1960), S tru ctu re a n d Process in M od er n S ocieties, F r ee P r ess, Glen coe, IL.
Ra sm u ssen , R. a n d Roth stein , R. (1990), “Sh a r ed
decision m a k in g th e fir st yea r ”, Los An geles
Un