3.8 Article Retracted Publication

被撤回的出版物: Exploring managerial skills of Pakistan Public Universities (PPUs)' middle managers for campus sustainability (Retracted article. See vol. 13, pg. 1129, 2023)

期刊

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/20430795.2021.1883985

关键词

Managerial skills; technical skills; interpersonal skills; campus sustainability; capacity building; training and development

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The management of an institution is crucial for its success or failure. Educational management and administration draw on the characteristics of the business model to guide the operations of higher education institutions. The study explored the managerial skills needed to promote campus sustainability at Pakistan Public Universities (PPUs) and identified three types of skills: technical skills, interpersonal skills, and training and development. Challenges were found to hinder the improvement of these skills.
Management of an institution determines its success or failure. Educational management and administration borrow the characteristics of business model with reference to the operations of higher education institutions. Managerial skills in this regard for campus sustainability are of great significance. However, there is a lack of study that comprehensively explores these skills. This study aimed at exploring the managerial skills to promote campus sustainability at Pakistan Public Universities (PPUs). The qualitative case study research design was employed to gain a deeper understanding of middle managers from PPUs. Semi-structured interviews and thematic analysis of documents were used to gather the data. Results found three types of managerial skills: technical skills, interpersonal skills and training and development. Challenges were found to create hurdles to improve these skills. Being the first qualitative study in Pakistan perspectives, the findings cannot be generalized but can be transferable to other public universities in Pakistan.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据