Fact and Value in University Decision‐Making
| Published date | 01 January 1964 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb009577 |
| Pages | 23-38 |
| Date | 01 January 1964 |
| Author | S.A. RAYNER |
| Subject Matter | Education |
THE JOURNAL OP EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION 23
VOLUME II, NUMBER 1 MAY, 1964
Fact and Value in University-
Decision- Making
S. A. RAYNER
(Based on a discussion paper presented to the Queensland Institute for Educa-
tional Research, 12th November, 1963.)
Simon, in his Administrative Behavior presents a systematic
theory of administration which emphasizes correct decision-
making. Decision-making has a factual and an ethical content; it
always requires the comparison of alternative means in terms of
the likely consequences. Thus a policy-making body must have
ready access to advice and information, particularly on the con-
sequences of alternatives. Some universities in Britain, U.S.A.
and Australia have set out deliberately to formulate their values
or ultimate objectives. In Australia the publication of the Murray
Report and of the reports of the Universities Commission have
made much more likely the formulation of a set of values accept-
able to university administrators as a guide for decision-making.
Further, a beginning has been made in the collation of factual
data which might bear on these values, for example in the area
of staff-student ratios. With the general acceptance of com-
puters and offices of institutional research there Is a greater
likelihood of clarifying objectives and of testing the extent to
which they are being met, as a guide to effective decision-making.
INTRODUCTORY
"To recognize how far actual decisions fall short of ration-
ality is no criticism of the administrator, who must act
whether or not he possesses the information that would be
necessary for the complete rationality of his decisions. It
is,
however, a criticism of apologies that would make his
ignorance a virtue, and would question the need for exten-
sive programmes of research in this direction."1
As university administration is, in British countries at least, a
field open to the untrained amateur successful in some other
field, it is hardly surprising that there exists neither a compre-
hensive text nor a series of scholarly monographs on this topic.
In the United Kingdom, the available material consists of such
volumes as Dundonald's Letters to a Vice-Chancellor supple-
mented by background reading on objectives by such well worn
DR. S. A. RAYNER is Deputy Registrar of the University of Queensland. He
has taught in Queensland primary schools and has worked as a research officer
with the Australian Council for Educational Research and the Queensland
Department of Education. He is a graduate of the Universities of Queensland
(MA.),
Melbourne (M.Ed.) and Illinois (Ed.D.) and is the author of several
books and journal articles. During 1963 Dr. Rayner spent three months exam-
ining University Administration in Great Britain and North America.
24 Journal of Educational Administration
authors as Newman or Truscott; these will now doubtless be
superseded by the Robbins Report.
In the United States, where the number of universities and col-
leges is greater and where university administrators are more
influential than in the United Kingdom or Australia, there has
been greater interest in the publication of treatises on college
management and of a systematic theory embodying principles
of general organization. As the volume most commonly referred
to by American administrators as "the best book read recently"
was Herbert A. Simon's Administrative Behaviour, it is of some
interest to discover the extent to which the ideas of administra-
tive theory in this book can be regarded as applicable to univer-
sity administration, particularly in Queensland or Australia.
The current popularity of this book is of course an indication
of the slow speed with which ideas are diffused. As the original
book was printed in 1945, the examples are drawn largely from
the period before World War II; Simon's current popularity al-
most certainly depends on the fact that, by emphasizing decis-
ion-making as the heart of administration and by stressing the
need for analysis of the elements of value and of fact entering
into decisions, he points to the weakness in current administra-
tive theory and practice which results from a lack of relevant
facts and precise measurements.
As the object of the present paper is to consider the relevance
for university administration in this country of concepts empha-
sized by Simon, the remaining parts of this Introductory section
summarize aspects of his argument.
The Neglect of Decision-Making
By contrast with those writers on administration who were
preoccupied with the processes and methods for ensuring incisive
action, Simon's view that—
"A general theory of administration must include principles
of organisation that will insure correct decision-making, just
as it must include principles that will insure effective
action"2
led him to direct his attention to the neglected factor, "the pro-
cess of choice which leads to action". However, although the
constant emphasis is on decision-making, the sections or chapters
on such topics as "Communication", "Co-ordination", "Loyal-
ties and Organisational Identification", "Efficiency", and "The
Role of Authority" provide discussion on "the art of getting
things done".
Simon argues that the neglect of the process of choice by
writers on administrative theory has resulted from the view that
decision-making is confined to the formulation of overall policy.
By contrast, he asserts that the process of decision does not
come to an end when the general purpose of an organization has
been determined but that there follows the task at lower admin-
istrative levels of making the very much larger number of sub-
To continue reading
Request your trial