臺灣高等教育學校組織文化與全面品質管理對促進國際化之影響

Abstract

社會經濟和文化受到全球化變革影響，利害關係人對教育系統提出更高要求和績效責任，大學以重視內部品質和邁向國際化發展以回應其要求。本論文以問卷調查法之便利抽樣方式對北、中、南19間四年制大專校院之國際事務處人員進行施測，共發出175份問卷，共計蒐集到150份有效問卷（回收率85.7%）。並採個案研究法中的訪談對A校兩位一級主管與五位國際學生進行訪談，蒐集實徵資料探討高教學校中組織文化、全面品質管理與國際化之現況、相關情形與高教學校組織文化與全面品質管理對大學國際化之影響。研究者分析量化與質性資料後，得出如下結論：一、高教學校組織文化偏重生命共同體模式，但不利於全面品質管理與國際化發展。二、市場競爭模式、靈活創新模式之文化模式有助於全面品質管理與國際化發展。三、加強高教學校全面品質管理之運用可促發國際化發展。四、高教學校發展國際化之主動力不足。五、高教學校都採用全面品質管理治理國際化發展，即便學校沒有宣稱使用。六、高教學校國際化發展的深度和廣度不足。 研究者針對質化與量化研究結果提出以下建議：一、處室透過建立國際化品質指導手冊，觸動大學建立國際化意識並追求國際化成效之卓越；二、建置完整的國際化資訊平臺以利國際化宣傳及大數據分析；三、對偏重生命共同體模式大學之建議–建立競爭型策略與國際化法規；四、對偏重靈活創新模式大學之建議–建立線上付費課程籌措國際化專款，並建立國際化發展獎勵機制；五、對偏重市場競爭模式大學之建議–與國內外標竿學校交流，擴增領導者國際視野；六、對偏重層級節制模式大學之建議–蒐集建構國際化意見，並授權成員執行國際化業務的空間；七、領導者完備化質量兼具之國際化績效評估；八、各系融入國際化的視野進行教育品質培訓；九、成立推動大學國際化智囊團；十、進行小學、中學與大學國際化之本土與跨國縱貫研究。面對全球化帶來知識、經濟與勞動各方面的流動，研究者認為未來數十年關於大學國際化品質議題將於高教領域蓬勃發展。The social economy and culture are being affected by the globalization revolution; as such, stakeholders have higher requirements and accountability for the education system. Higher education responds to their requirements by emphasizing internal quality and international development. This dissertation surveys the staff of the Office of International Affairs (OIA) of 19 four-year colleges in North, Central and South Taiwan by convenience sampling. A total of 175 questionnaires were sent out, and a total of 150 valid questionnaires were collected (a response rate of 85.7%). In addition, two first-level supervisors and five international students of a school were interviewed, and the data was collected to discuss the organization culture for total quality management and internationalization of higher education regarding Taiwanese situations, correlation and influence. After analyzing the quantitative and qualitative data, conclusions have been made as follows: (a) the organizational culture of higher education schools focuses more on clan culture, but it is not conducive to Total Quality Management and international development; (b) market culture and adhocracy culture are conducive to comprehensive quality management and international development; (c) strengthening the application of Total Quality Management in higher education can trigger international development; (d) the active force for the internationalization of higher education schools is insufficient; (e) higher education adopts total quality management to govern international development, even if the school does not claim to use it; and (f) the depth and breadth of the international development of higher education schools is insufficient. The researcher makes the following recommendations: (a) through an international guidebook distinguishing different levels quality, the department/OIA triggers higher education schools to establish international awareness and pursue excellence in internationalization; (b) a complete international information platform needs to be established to facilitate international publicity and big data analysis; (c) suggestions for clan culture are proffered, in particular establishing competitive strategies and international regulations; (d) suggestions are made for adhocracy culture, such as establishing international payment online training courses to raise international funds and establishing an international development incentive mechanism; (e) suggestions are given for market culture, such as communicating with domestic and international benchmark universities to expand leaders’ international visions; (f) suggestions are also made for hierarchy culture, namely collecting and constructing international opinions and empowering members to implement international affairs; and (g) university leaders should establish qualitative and quantitative evaluation to assess internationalized activities/project performance.