OBSERVARE

Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier – Internationalization of Higher Education:

Experiences and Challenges

June 2025

MANAGEMENT STYLES AND ORGANIZATIONAL INTELLIGENCE

LEVEL OF HIGHER EDUCATION ADMINISTRATORS

DILEK YÖRÜK

dilekyoruk@hacettepe.edu.tr

Dilek Yörük completed her undergraduate studies in the Department of Philosophy at Hacettepe

University and received her master’s degree from the Department of Guidance and Psychological

Counseling at Gazi University. She is currently continuing her doctoral studies in Educational

Administration at Hacettepe University (Turkey). In her professional career, she has held

positions in guidance counseling, administration, and institutional management in various

educational institutions. Her academic work focuses on educational administration, leadership

processes, fear of success, and student achievement.

Abstract

With the influence of globalization, the responsibilities of administrators are increasing day by

day. Akademic and administrative managers in higher education institutions guide students

academically, socially, and psychologically, and the quality of this guidance directly affects

the organizational intelligence of institutions, which in turn influences the quality of services

provided and stakeholder satisfaction. However, no study has been found that examines the

relationship between higher education administrators’ leadership styles and organizational

intelligence within a theoretical framework. No studies have been found that directly examine

the relationship between the management styles of higher education administrators and

organizational intelligence, although there are studies that are indirectly related. The purpose

of this study is to explain the concepts of management styles of higher education

administrators and organizational intelligence of instituons, and to discuss their theoretical

foundations. It has been prepared using a qualitative literatüre review method. Case studies

available in TR Index and Turcademy.com were examined, and the effects of management

styless and organizational intelligence in higher education were analyzed. The data obtained

were processed primarily using content analysis. The findings were examined carefully, in

detail, and systematically, then classified and interpreted. This research contributes to

understanding of the role of higher education administrators management styles in

organizational intelligence.

Keywords

Organizational intelligence, Management, Management Style, Administrator.

Resumo

Com o avanço da globalização, as responsabilidades atribuídas aos administradores das

Instituições de Ensino Superior têm-se intensificado progressivamente. Os gestores

académicos e administrativos assumem um papel fundamental na orientação dos estudantes,

não apenas a nível académico, mas também nos domínios social e psicológico. A qualidade

dessa orientação tem um impacto direto na inteligência organizacional das instituições, a qual,

por sua vez, influencia significativamente a qualidade dos serviços prestados e o grau de

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

satisfação das partes interessadas. Apesar da relevância do tema, não se identificaram

estudos que abordem, de forma direta e enquadrada teoricamente, a relação entre os estilos

de liderança dos administradores do ensino superior e a inteligência organizacional. Embora

existam investigações com ligações indiretas, verifica-se uma lacuna na literatura

relativamente à exploração sistemática desta relação. O presente estudo tem como objetivo

principal clarificar os conceitos de estilos de gestão dos administradores do ensino superior e

de inteligência organizacional, bem como discutir os respetivos fundamentos teóricos. A

investigação foi desenvolvida com base numa metodologia de revisão qualitativa da literatura.

Para tal, foram analisados estudos de caso disponíveis em bases de dados como o TR Index

e o Turcademy.com, com o intuito de examinar os efeitos dos estilos de gestão e da

inteligência organizacional no contexto do ensino superior. Os dados recolhidos foram tratados

maioritariamente através de análise de conteúdo. Os resultados foram analisados de forma

minuciosa, sistemática e detalhada, sendo posteriormente organizados e interpretados com

base em categorias temáticas relevantes. Esta investigação pretende contribuir para um

melhor entendimento do papel dos estilos de gestão adotados pelos administradores no

desenvolvimento da inteligência organizacional nas instituições de ensino superior,

oferecendo, assim, um referencial teórico para estudos futuros nesta área.

Palavras-chave

Inteligência Organizacional, Gestão, Estilo de gestão, Administrador.

How to cite this article

Yörük, Dilek (2025). Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education

Administrators. Janus.net, e-journal of international relations. Thematic Dossier -

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges. VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1. June

2025, pp. 36-51. DOI https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.DT0325.3.

Article submitted on 24th march 2025 and accepted for publication on 4 may 2025.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

MANAGEMENT STYLES AND ORGANIZATIONAL INTELLIGENCE

LEVEL OF HIGHER EDUCATION ADMINISTRATORS

DILEK YÖRÜK

1. Introduction

The fundamental principles and functions of management are valid for all organizations.

While public institutions, voluntary organizations, and private sector organizations differ

in their implementation styles (Erdoğan,1994), the success and effectiveness of

organizations depend not on their type but on the efficiency and capability of their

management. Just as water and air are vital for living organisms, successful and effective

management is the lifeline of organizations. This is closely related to the organization’s

cultural values, organizational intelligence, the harmony of its management style, and

the functions of its administrators.

Higher education represents the final and most critical level of formal education in

preparing future generations. It plays a key role in a country’s development across

economic, industrial, cultural, technological, political, and many other domains (Ünsal,

2016). This diversity reflects not only on the execution of academic duties but also on

the differentiation of expertise between departments, making the bureaucratic structure

more complex. Although quantitative criteria such as punctual attendance, timely

fulfilment of responsibilities, and positive student evaluations are commonly used to

assess academic performance, these often result in a mechanical perception of the

academician. Nevertheless, it is essential to prioritize and preserve educational quality.

In the absence of comprehensive tools to assess academic quality, more easily

measurable elements such as class attendance, timely grade entry, student evaluations,

and job continuity become the primary focus. A shared governance model based on

checks and balances and coordinated collaboration between academic and administrative

units fosters neutrality. Howoever, not all societies or higher education institutions can

adapt to the changes brought by globalization. Some struggle to keep up with

contemporary developments. Moreover, the standardization movement has caused

higher education institutions to prioritize accreditation over individual institutional

identity. Therefore, management styles in higher education have become a crucial issue

requiring close attention (Celep & Tülübaş, 2015).

This study was prepared using a qualitative literature review method. Case studies

included in the existing literature in TR Dizin and Turcademy.com were examined, and

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

management styles, management styles in higher education, and their effects on

organizational intelligence were analyzed. In processing the data obtained from these

sources, content analysis was commonly utilized. The data collected during this process

were examined carefully, thoroughly, and systematically, then classified and interpreted.

The data were obtained from academic articles, books, master's/doctoral theses, and

peer-reviewed journal publications. The selected studies were particularly those

conducted in higher education institutions, addressing the relationship between

management styles and organizational intelligence, covering basic management theories,

and published within the last 5–10 years. The aim of this article is to explore the concepts

of management, management styles, and organizational intelligence and to examine how

they are explained with the help of the classical management theories on which the

literature is based, particularly through the management process approach. In this

context, a qualitative literature review was conducted, first addressing the question of

“what is management, what is a management style?” and then examining the

relationship between organizational intelligence and management styles in higher

education. Understanding the theoretical foundations of management styles in higher

education will contribute to a better understanding of the organizational implications of

the subject.

When the national literature is examined, some of the case studies that investigate the

effects of management styles in higher education institutions on organizational

intelligence are as follows: Tekbulut (2017) investigated the relationship between

leadership styles, organizational citizenship behaviors, and academic performance, based

on the participation of 291 faculty members working during the 2015–2016 academic

year at Hacettepe University, Middle East Technical University (METU), and Gazi

University. The results of the study showed significant differences in faculty members’

views on the department chair’s leadership style according to the faculty and university

variables.

In Turkey, various institutions including the Ministry of Youth and Sports, the Ministry of

Development, the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK),

the Council of Higher Education (YÖK), and numerous non-governmental organizations

actively support youth-oriented projects and scientific research. These bodies provide

assistance to young individuals, initiatives targeting youth, and researchers through

scholarships and grant programs. A tangible example of such support is the International

Youth and Science Center project. In their (2018) study, Açıkalın, Erçetin, Potas, and

Güngör examined the perspectives of 1,958 young individuals aged 15 to 29 who

participated in the International Youth and Science Center in Ankara. The study aimed to

assess participants’ views on the planned scientific activities. The findings revealed that

participants reported high levels of satisfaction with the scientific events, the educators

involved, and the physical facilities and educational materials provided. Furthermore, the

participants perceived the educators as competent in their subject areas and

acknowledged that the scientific activities contributed positively to their career planning

and personal development.

In a study conducted by Altıntaş and Özata (2024) at Yozgat Bozok University, the effects

of transformational and transactional leadership styles on employee satisfaction were

analyzed. The findings revealed that organizational trust and organizational commitment

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

played a partial mediating role in the effect of transformational and transactional

leadership on employee satisfaction among healthcare workers. Among education

workers, organizational trust and commitment partially mediated the effect of

transformational leadership on employee satisfaction, whereas in the case of

transactional leadership, these factors played a full mediating role. Organizational

communication was not found to significantly affect employee satisfaction; hence, no

mediating effect was observed.

Aktemur (2016) investigated the effects of administrators’ leadership styles on

employees’ emotional intelligence and perceptions of organizational culture. The study

was conducted with a total of 103 participants, including managerial staff and teachers

from a private educational institution in Istanbul. The analysis showed statistically

significant relationships between educational level and emotional intelligence, years of

service and charismatic leadership, empowering leadership and personal competence,

self-management, social awareness, and relationship management, transformational

leadership and organizational identity, norms, rituals, perceived values, and institutional

image, and similarly, charismatic leadership and empowering leadership with those same

variables related to organizational culture.

Göl (2018) analyzed the relationship between decision-making styles of higher education

administrators and organizational culture. The study was conducted during the 2016–

2017 academic year with 310 administrators working in public and foundation universities

in Turkey. According to the findings, a significant difference emerged only in terms of

seniority among demographic variables. However, when means were considered,

differences were observed for other demographic variables as well. Additionally, there

were varying levels and strengths of relationships between perceived organizational

culture types and preferred decision-making styles.

This study attempts to examine management styles and organizational intelligence in

higher education within a general framework, based on Henry Fayol’s Management

Process Approach from Classical Management Theories. This is because the management

process approach encompasses principles directly related to management styles.

Management styles in higher education institutions are highly influential in shaping

organizational intelligence. Factors such as transformational leadership, ethical

leadership, and emotional intelligence contribute to enhancing organizational

intelligence, enabling institutions to adapt more effectively and become more innovative

in response to environmental changes. The case studies mentioned above demonstrate

that leadership approaches have a direct impact on areas such as employee satisfaction,

organizational commitment, and academic performance. In this regard, although this

study focuses on examining the relationship between management styles and

organizational intelligence in higher education institutions through the management

process approach from Classical Management Theories, it is also supported by the

Contingency Theory, Transformational Leadership Theory, and Organizational Learning

Theory.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

2. The Concept of Management and Management Styles

The concept of management has existed as a discipline for centuries. Management is the

process of directing all resources in an organization primarily human resources toward

predetermined objectives and controling them around organizational goals (Bursalıoğlu,

2012). While what a manager should do is generally defined by procedures in the private

sector and by regulations in the public sector, how a manager should do it is often unclear

(Özgür, 2011). The fundemental question in management, therefore, is “what to do” and

“how to do it.” Studies on management styless are expected to guide policymakers and

educators. A management style effective in one society may hold little significance in

another. Therefore, it seems implausible to talk about a standart set of management

styles. Moiden (2002) argues that there is no consensus on the “most appropriate

management style.” Therefore, the expected outcome of the management process is to

apply the style most suitable for achieving the organization’s goals and objectives. When

confronted with conflict, a manager must determine and implement appropriate

resolution strategies. However, addressing conflict merely through organizational

strategies may prove insufficient. Managers must also understand how individuals

involved in the conflict perceive and approach it (Moberg, 2001: 48). Each manager acts

as a conflict resolver within their organization and develops a personel management

style. Effective managers are responsible for ensuring that their organizations operate

constructively and productively. From this understanding, three fundamental

management style have emerged: autocratic, democratic-participative, and laissez faire.

Autocratic Management Style: In this style, managers concentrate all power, authority,

and responsibility in themselves and grant no say to subordinates. The opinions of

subordinates are considered insignificant, and the primary concern is the fulfillment of

tasks. This style is typically adopted in situations requiring swift decision making or in

organizations with unmotivated and untrained personnel who must be mobilized quickly

through pressure or fear.

Democratic-Participative Management Style: This style involves managers encouraging

subordinates to contribute to decision but does so after gathering input from

subordinates. This style aims not only to achieve organizational goals but also to benefit

from the managerial capabilities of subordinates. It does not rely on a centralized

authority. The manager delegates tasks and responsibilities to subordinates, and

decisions are made collectively in meetings. In this style, the manager’s attitude is

particularly important.

Laissez-Faire Management Style: Also known as the “hands-off” style, managers provide

subordinates with a goal but allow them freedom in how to achieve it. According to Eren

(1993), this style requires minimal managerial authority, with the manager acting as a

supporter within the manager acting as a supporter within the bounds of the resources

provided, taking on a monitoring role. Organizational succes depends more on the

members than on the manager. To implement this style effectively, members must be

experts in their work and possess a strong sense of responsibility (Yılmaz, 2016).

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

3. The Concept of Organization and Organizational Intelligence

The relationship between individual and collective learning is of great importance in

organizational theory. Although organizational learning occurs through individuals, it is a

mistake to consider it merely as the sum of individuals learning. Organizations do not

possess brains, but they do have cognitive systems and memory. İndividuals come and

go, leaders change , yet the memory of organization preserves certain behaviors,

cognitive maps, norms, and values over time. Organizations that fail to internalize the

philosophy of organizational learning lose their ability to renew themselves, shape the

future, and create differentiation compared to their competitors. A learning organization

is one that possesses the ability to generate acquire, and transfer knowledge and to

modify its behaviors in accordance with new knowledge and insights. In this context,

organization’s adaptation to its environment its ability to raise awareness and transform

its surroundings through Collective action and shared consciousness based on its goals

and capabilities. In organizations that aim for high performance, members must engage

in a Collective effort to refine, preserve, and transform both individual and organizational

knowledge essentially, to focus on knowledge management, a key component of

organizational intelligence. In this sense, organizational intelligence is defined as the

willingness, unity, and ability of organizational members to enhance performance, refine

Professional knowledge collectively, and communicate intelligently informed meanings

through organizational behavior. Organizational intelligence is the foundation and key to

the process of organizational learning (Yıldırım, 2006: 147). The importance of intelligent

behavior within the structure and operations of organizations is undeniable. The reflection

of this intelligence in organizational behavior is driven by internal dynamics (Neyişçi,

2018).

In the 2014-2015 academic year, a study was conducted with a total of 48 people in a

primary school in Ankara to determine the social network structure of organizational

intelligence and operational sub-dimensions and to determine how the social network

structure differs. In the data collection, the "Multidimensional Organizational Intelligence

Scale" was used to determine the organizational intelligence and operational sub-

dimensions of the primary school and the "Social Network" data collection form was used

to determine the characteristics of the network mechanism and the relationships of the

actors in the network mechanism. Social network analysis, descriptive statistics, t-test

and variance analysis were used in the analysis of the data. According to the research

results, teacher and administrator perceptions regarding the intelligence level of the

school were generally determined as very high and high (Neyişçi and Erçetin, 2020).

Additionally, Potas et al. (2017) found that teachers' perceptions of the organizational

intelligence levels of the schools they work in were high.

Various researchers have proposed different definitions of organizational intelligence.

Weber et.al. (1996, as cited in Erçetin, 2004) define it as on organization’s ability to

adapt to, shape, and transform its environment through Collective action and

consciousness in live with its goals and competencies. Simic (2005), on the other hand,

defines it as “an organization’s intellectual capacity to solve organizational problems.”

One influential framework in the literatüre is that of Terenzini (1993), who conceptualizes

organizational intelligence through three dimensions: 1) technical-analytical, 2) problem-

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

solving, and 3) contextual. The technical-analytical dimension consists of factual

knowledge or information and analytical/methodological skills. Factual knowledge refers

to the operational principles and norms found in legal administrative texts about an

organization’s structure and functioning, as well as the resulting actions. Analytical and

methodological competencies pertain to the processing, assessment, and interpretation

of data related to organizational outcomes and help facilitate planning, monitoring, and

evaluation processes aligned with organizational goals. The problem-solving dimension

addresses various managerial issues and includes the effective operation of both formal

and informal organizational structures. The contextual dimension integrates the technical

analytical and problem-solving dimensions within the organization’s cultural elements

such as history, value systems, and norms. This dimension refers to the process of

forming organizational identity. In summary:

− Organizations, like individuals, possess intelligence.

− Organizational intelligence should be analyzed through a multifaceted lens, taking

into account interacting components.

− It is synergistic, involving the interaction and energy transfer from individual to

organization and vice versa.

− Emotional intelligence and competencies of individuals play a critical role in this

process.

To sustain the health and effectiveness of this living system (i.e., the organization), the

emotional intelligence and competencies of individuals who are its most critical elements

must be transformed into the collective emotional intelligence and competencies of the

organization. At the individual level, emotional intelligence encompasses self-awareness,

self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and interpersonal skills. On an institutional level,

these correspond to organizational self-awareness (culture), emotional management, a

shared and pursued vision, organizational self- assessment and environmental

sensitivity, and effective communication (Erçetin, 2000: 16).

In organizations are viewed as living, learning, adapting, evolving entities then managers

can be seen as interpreters of organizational intelligence. From this perspective,

organizations to make decisions regarding both routine activities and unexpected

situations in a dynamic global environment and their capacity to employ those capabilities

(Erçetin, 2004: 42).

Ultimately, organizational intelligence entails: Quickness in action and response,

adaptability to change, operational flexibility and ease, intuition and foresight, open-

mindedness, creativity and imagination, and the capacity for renewal.

In their work, Halal and Kull (1998) identify various variables and benefits of

organizational intelligence, including information Technologies and systems,

organizational structure, culture, ecological relationships, knowledge assets, strategic

processes, dynamic factors, and performance. According to their findings:

− Managers and organizational members can assess the proactive capabilities of the

entire organizational system.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

− The patterns of the organization’s relationships with its environment can be

understood.

− The organization’s strengths and weaknesses can be identified.

− Proposals that foster knowledge creation and creativity in sub systems and the

organization as a whole can be developed.

− Gains can be increased through dynamic factors such as leadership (Erçetin, 2004).

4. Classical Management Theory, the Process Approach, and the

Contingency Approach

Classical Management Theory, which continues to influence contemporary management

thought, includes Max Weber’s Bureaucratic Theory, F.W. Taylor’s Scientific Management

Theory, and Henri Fayol’s Administrative (Process) Management Approach. Rather than

describing what is, this theory focuses on what ought to be (Mahmood & Basharat, 2012:

512). According to this theory, structure is central to the functioning of organizations;

thus, classical theorists concentrated their attention on the design of formal

organizational structures. Within this framework, the theory is built upon four

foundational elements: division of labor, hierarchy, structure, and control (Turan & Şahin,

2016: 31).

To understand Fayol’s views more clearly, one must consider the era in which he lived.

The general characteristics of Classical Management Thinking and its proponents are as

follows:

− It emerged in the aftermath of the Industrial Revolution.

− It emphasized increasing added value and enhancing performance.

− It was rule-oriented, normative, and imposed a rigid discipline on employees.

− Centralized and hierarchical management structures were dominant.

− Job secutiry for workers was considered important.

− Workers were often viewed as machines, ignoring emotional and psychological

dimensions.

− Personal issues of workers were assumed to have no effect on productivity.

− Organizations were seen as closed systems with no interaction with the environment.

− Productivity was believed to increase through specialization and division of labor

(Karaboğa & Zehir, 2020).

A significant portion of the theoretical foundation of Classical Management Theory is

based on Fayol’s Process Management Approach. Fayol’s work focused primarily on

management functions. In his 1916 publication Administration Industrielle et Generale

(General and Industrial Management), he introduced six managerial functions and

fourteen principles of management: Division of work, authority and responsibility,

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

discipline, unity of command, unity of direction, subordination of individual interests to

general interest, fair remuneration, centralization, scalar chain, order, equity, stability of

personnel, initiative, and esprit de corps.

Fayol believed the following about these principles (Fayol, 2005):

− Nothing in management is absolute or definitive.

− Management is a matter of measurement and comparison.

− Even under similar conditions, the same principle is rarely applied in the same way.

− Practice should consider changing and diverse circumstances.

− Principles must be flexible and adaptable to needs.

− Knowing how to apply them is essential this requires significant skill.

− Experience, intelligence, decisiveness, and comparative judgment are essential to

applying principles effectively.

− There is no limit to management principles.

− Every rule and method shown through experience to facilitate management functions

and strengthen the organization can be considered a management principle.

According to Fayol, organizations should have hierarchical structures, and management

authority should rest with top managers. Lower-level managers must regularly inform

upper management about work activities (Mahmood & Basharat, 2012).

Emerging in the 1960s, the Contingency Approach of Modern Management Theory posits

that every organization is unique in terms of its subsystems and environment. It proposes

that the management process should be internally referenced and context dependent

(Gültekin, 2004). In contingency thinking, the practice of management should align with

what the situation demands. Success lies in fit and flexibility; therefore, there is no

universally best management approach. Management style, leadership effectiveness, or

organizational structure varies by context. That is, organizations adapt to specific

environmental conditions and variables to be successful. This approach, while

highlighting the unique and dynamic nature of organizations, also offers clarity on how

they should be managed.

The concept. Of Transformational Leadership was first introduced by Burns in 1978 and

later developed by Bass in 1985. Gaining prominence in the 1990s, the theory of

transformational leadership describes visionary leaders who lead their organizations to

success, support the performance of their followers, and create new opportunities. It

emphasizes empowerment and motivation as tools to change institutional culture and

values. Transformational leaders are those who transfer strategic visions and strategies

to a Collective team spirit, find clear and feasible solutions quality. They inspire others to

follow suit. These leaders are charismatic, intellectually engaging, and foster high levels

of trust and identification among followers. Higher education institutions, which need to

adapt to rapidly changing technological, economic, social, and cultural trends, require

continuous transformation. Given the increasing importance of entrepreneurial

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

universities, transformation leadership plays a vital role in enabling institutions to keep

pace with global change. Such leaders empower academic staff and enhance productivity.

In higher education, transformational leaders also serve as sources of inspiration for

students (Karadağ, 2024).

The theory of Organizational Learning includes various models and approaches. It posits

that organizations generate two types of knowledge necessary for operations: “process

knowledge” and “deep knowledge” (Anderson et al., 1994). Process knowledge involves

the Technologies, human capital, and task requirements that guide organizational

operations and define quality standards. Deep knowledge, on the other hand,

encompasses foundational disciplines such as systems theory, statistics, and psychology.

While process knowledge helps understand the production and distribution of goods and

services, deep knowledge facilitates the learning processes within the organization.

Utilizing both types of knowledge lead to continuous improvement in products, services,

and processes (Aydınlı, 2005). The concept of the “learning organization,” popularized in

the 1990s through Peter M. Senge’s book The Fifth Discipline (2007), refers to

organizations that facilitate the learning of their members and continuously transform

themselves. Just as individuals learn, so too do organizations. This learning process is

Collective and includes acquiring knowledge, gathering information, and changing

behavior. It promotes adaptation to the environment and supports innovation and

competitiveness.

When we evaluate the relationship between organizational intelligence and organizational

learning, we find that organizational intelligence enables leaders to make strategic and

creative decisions by using information quickly and effectively. Meanwhile, organizational

learning brings about behavioral change through the acquisition of knowledge. In turn,

organizational intelligence enhances the quality and pace of learning processes. Thus,

there is a mutually reinforcing relationship between organizational intelligence and

organizational learning like branches growing from the same rooted tree. In choosing a

management style in higher education, administrators must consider both organizational

learning as indispensable tools for achieving effective and solution-oriented outcomes.

5. Conclusion and Recommendations

It is observed that contemporary universities have undergone a transformation,

influenced by global implementations of new public management, neoliberal policies, and

the concept of globalization, which began in the 1980s.In this context, efficiency and

accountability have become the primary focus in higher education institutions and among

their representatives. Management practices in the higher education sector have shifted

from collegial governance to a more institutional or commercial paradigm, functioning as

mechanisms for control, cost reduction, and the advancement of specific policy agendas.

This transformation has led to a decline in the influence of academics in goal-oriented

decision-making processes, with authority shifting from academia to hierarchical

structures.

In a critical perspective toward this shift, which evaluates universities through the lens

of business logic, Owen (2003: 43) advocates for a culture of evaluation in higher

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

education institutions. He emphasizes the necessity of implementing evidence-based

practices by involving staff in decision making processes to promote continuous

organizational development. In this context, transformational leadership may servet he

success of organizations by aligning with these objectives, However, today’s university

academics, who are expected to be the main participants in university governance, often

find themselves burdened by excessive workloads and low salaries. Through increased

collegial participation, it may be possible to meet their legitimate need for a voice in

institutional matters. Therefore, effective managers should focus on systems of

organizational learning, organizational intelligence, and design processes. When these

conditions are met, the participation of all stakeholders and the empowerment of

personnel will be ensured leading to greater accountability. Consequently, academics will

be better equipped to fulfill their duties in a manner aligned with institutional

expectations.

Mintzberg (1994) does not view employees merely as passive implementers within

organizations but rather as effective strategists. He defines universities as Professional

organizations in which employees are loosely and often inadequately involved in

organizational processes. From this perspective, he criticizes top-down management

styles. Hence, we may contrast Fayol’s process approach with Mintzberg’s emphasis on

employee agency and suggest that practitioners consider complementary viewpoints

while applying Fayol’s principles in higher education setting.

Ramsden observes a shift in Australian universities from bureaucratic structures to

learning oriented frameworks. He argues that top-down administrative control is both

erroneous and problematic. In this context, comparing higher education management in

Turkey with that of other countries may serve as a valuable tool for evaluating and

benchmarking institutional performance.

In the 21st century, the international system has become more complex and

interdependent, with mutual relations becoming more diversified and intense. On the

other hand, Turkey has shown great success since the early 2000s by increasing

employment and income levels in terms of both economic and social development

performance. Turkey has become an upper-middle income country (Açıkalın, 2021). In

the field of education, university rankings affect the views and preferences of students,

academics, policy makers and other stakeholders. They often valuable insights into the

quality and reputation of universities worldwide. Academic quality which reflects the

effectiveness of teaching activities and educational programs encompasses both tangible

and intangible elements that affect student learning outcomes and experiences. Global

ranking systems, such as the Times Higher Education World University Ranking, evaluate

institutional effectiveness across a range of dimensions. These systems rely on

comprehensive datasets from approximately 1,800 universities worldwide (cited in Balcı,

2023). Therefore, it is recommended that higher education administrators in Turkey

closely monitor global ranking systems and use their indicators as tools to support

institutional dynamics, staff motivation, and student engagement.

Fayol argued that leaders who govern organizations based on his fourteen principles

would inevitably contribute to organizational effectiveness and efficiency. He believed

that without these principles, organizations would descend into chaos and operate in

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

darkness. Nonetheless, his theory has been subject to criticism for various reasons,

including its overly formal structure, insufficient attention to employee dynamics, vague

and sometimes superficial approaches, and its failure to associate managerial principles

with justice or ethical responsibilities. Fayol also faced criticism for being overly

universalist, neglecting empirical validation, viewing organizations as closed systems,

and promoting a single management approach applicable under all circumstances.

Moreover, the assumption that management functions such as planning, organizing,

directing, coordinating, and controlling are naturally inherent to management is now

considered a fallacy. Rather than debating the current relevance of Fayol’s ideas, it may

be more productive to examine how his general management approach corresponds to

contemporary management theories. This approach would help us enhance our

knowledge of management and identify commonalities among diverse theoretical

perspectives (Karaboğa & Zehir, 2020).

Despite this criticism, Fayol has left an indelible mark on the history of management. His

theory has not faded over time and continues to offer valuable insights for contemporary

organizational leaders. Based on the theory and the process approach discussed in this

study, it is recommended that higher education administrators serve as role models to

their staff, prioritize organizational intelligence without reducing institutions to closed

systems, and move beyond uniform management styles by responding to contextual

goals and needs. Managers should place importance on the human dimension of

organizations. Furthermore, it is advised that higher education institutions train their

leaders in hierarchical, rule based, disciplinary, and authority related matters or

collaborate with managers who demonstrate such competencies. In this way, role model

leaders will positively influence their teams, enhance organizational intelligence, and

contribute to the development of effective and successful management styles.

By adhering to Fayol’s principles and utilizing management functions appropriately,

framework can be established in alignment with the Contingency Theory’s unique and

integrative understanding of organizations. Projects and educational initiatives (such as

courses and R&D studies) may also be used to support personnel development in this

area. A key limitation of this study is that it explores management styles and

organizational intelligence using only a limited number of theories. Future studies may

consider additional theoretical frameworks to examine how managers influence their

institutions through their management styles and organizational intelligence.

In summary; The management styles of higher education administrators and the concept

of organizational intelligence have been examined through the lens of the process

approach in classical management theory, as well as through the Contingency Theory

and Organizational Learning Theory. Today’s higher education institutions have evolved

far beyond classical bureaucratic structures. Various factors lie at the core of

organizational intelligence in universities. These institutions now seek to go beyond

national boundaries and secure a place on international platforms while preserving their

uniqueness. In the face of a global and competitive World order, universities must become

more flexible, adaptive and agile. The pursuit of institutional rankings, accreditations of

the need to align with an ever-changing information society to manage academic data,

scientific outputs, and institutional processes systematically, universities have developed

intelligence-based structures such as digital transformation initiatives and R&D centers.

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

In the post COVID-19 era, digitalization has accelerated, and the experience of distance

education has underscored the importance of adaptability and flexibility. Although the

COVID-19 pandemic has had some positive impacts on students, it has also resulted in

various negative consequences. “The effects of the pandemic on students differ

significantly depending on the socio-economic status of their families. Low-income

families, particularly those engaged in daily-paid labor without a stable income, have

been more adversely affected and have experienced elevated stress levels compared to

others. Nevertheless, it can be posited that greater opportunities provided by parents

during this period may have led to different outcomes for gifted students. In this regard,

causal studies involving parents and children may be conducted to explore these

dynamics further.” (Erçetin et al., 2021: 18).

The challenges and successes faced by organizations during this process have

highlighted the critical role of management styles and decision-making capabilities in

education and training. Today, universities are no longer solely institutions of education

and research they are dynamic organizations contributing to knowledge production,

economic development, and social transformation. Tools such as graduate tracking

studies, evaluation mechanisms, strategic plans, information systems, and institutional

intelligence assessments such as those conducted by the Higher Education Quality

Council of Turkey (YÖKAK), indirectly measure the academic and strategic capacity of

universities. Throughout this transformative process, organizational memory,

management styles, learning structures, and organizational intelligence are of vital

importance in shaping the present and future of higher education institutions.

References

Açıkalın, Ş.N., (2021). China and Turkey relations from complexity theory perspective.

Atatürk University Social Sciences Institute Journal, 25(2), 775-789.

Açıkalın, Ş.N., Erçetin, Ş.Ş., Potaş, N., & Güngör, H. (2018). An Experience on

Introducing Science to Youth: The International Youth and Science Center. Mersin

University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 14(1), 436-449.

https://doi.org/10.17860/mersinefd.304070

Aktemur, A. (2016). Yöneticilerin liderlik tarzlarının çalışanların duygusal zekaları ve

örgüt kültürüne ilişkin algıları üzerindeki etkisi [The impact of managers’ leadership styles

on employees’ emotional intelligence and perceptions of organizational culture]

[Unpublished master’s thesis]. İstanbul Gelişim University.

Altıntaş, M. & Özata, M. (2024). Yükseköğretim kurumlarında dönüşümcü ve etkileşimci

liderliğin çalışan memnuniyeti üzerindeki etkisi: Örgütsel iletişim, örgütsel güven ve

örgütsel bağlılığın aracılık rolü [The effect of transformational and transactional

leadership on employee satisfaction in higher education institutions: The mediating role

of organizational communication, trust, and commitment]. Yükseköğretim Dergisi 14(3),

59-7. https://doi.org/10.53478/yuksekogretim.1319031

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

Anderson, J. C., Rungtusonathom, M. & Schoeder, R. G. (1994). A theory of QM

underlying The Deming Management Method. Academy of Management Review, 19(3),

472-509.

Aydınlı, H. İ. (2005). Örgütsel Öğrenme ve Oryantasyonları [Organizational learning and

orientations]. Bilgi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 1, 82-98.

Balcı, A. (2023). Yükseköğretim kurumlarının Etkililiği [Effectiveness of higher education

institutions] (1st ed.). Pegem Akademi.

Bursalıoğlu, Z. (2012). Eğitim yönetiminde teori ve uygulama [Theory and practice in

educational administration] (11th ed.). Pegem Akademi.

Celep, C. & Tülübaş. T. (2015). Yükseköğretimin yönetimi [Management of higher

education] (1st ed). Nobel Akademik.

Erçetin, Ş. Ş., Potas, N., Açıkalın, Ş. N., Koçtürk, N., & Abal, S. (2021). Effects of COVID-

19 on Gifted Students’ Quality of Life (QOL-GSS): Scale Development and Application.

Sakarya University Journal of Education, 11(1), 28-50.

https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.843116

Erçetin, Ş. (2000). Örgütsel zeka. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi, 24(24), 509-

526.

Erçetin, S.S. (2004). Örgütsel zeka ve örgütsel aptallık [Organizational intelligence and

organizational stupidity]. Asil Yayın Dağıtım.

Erdoğan, İ. (1994). İşletmelerde davranış [Behavior in businesses] (4th ed.) Beta Yayın.

Fayol, H. (2005). Genel ve endüstriyel yönetim [General and industrial management] (A.

Çalıkoğlu, Trans.) Adres Yayın.

Gültekin, B. (2004). Bir lider olarak İskender ve günümüz yönetim anlayışı [ Alexander

as a leader and contemporary management understanding]. Yönetim ve Ekonomi

Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 45 – 79.

Göl, E. (2018). Yükseköğretimde örgüt kültürü ile yönetsel karar verme stillerinin ilişkisi

[The relationship between organizational culture and managerial decision making styles

in higher education] [Unpublished doctoral dissertation], Çanakkkale Onsekiz Mart

University.

Karadağ, N. (2024). Yükseköğretim yönetiminin geleceği [The future of higher education

management] (1st ed.). Pegem Akademi.

Mahmood, Z. & Basharat, M. (2012). Reviev of classical management theories.

International Journal of Social Sciences and Education, 2(1), 512-522.

Neyişçi, N., & Erçetin, Ş. Ş. (2020). The effect of social network interactions on

development of organizational intelligence. Hacettepe University Journal of Education,

35(2), 354-374. doi: 10.16986/HUJE.2019052439

Neyişçi, N. Potas, N. ve Erçetin, Ş.Ş. (2018). Örgütsel zekâ algısı ve ortak değişkenlerin

etkisi: ANCOVA analizi ile incelenmesi [Perception of organizational intelligence and the

JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations

e-ISSN: 1647-7251

VOL. 16, Nº. 1, TD1

Thematic Dossier

Internationalization of Higher Education: Experiences and Challenges

June 2025, pp. 36-51

Management Styles and Organizational Intelligence Level of Higher Education Administrators

Dilek Yörük

effect of common variables: An analysis with ANCOVA]. Sakarya University Journal of

Education, 8(4), 300-318. https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.487492

Özer, M.A., & Çiftçi, A. (2022). Klasik Yönetim Teorisi’nin iki öncü ismi fayol ve weber’in

yönetime katkisi üzerine bir değerlendirme [An evaluation of the contributions of the

pioneers of classical management theory, Fayol and Weber, to management].

Fenerbahçe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2(1), 133-152.

Özgür, B. (2011). Yönetim tarzları ve etkileri [Management styles and their effects].

Maliye Dergisi, 161, 215-230.

Potas, N., Erçetin, Ş. Ş., Açikalin, Ş. N., & Turan, S., (2017). Quantum Leadership and

Organizational Intelligence Relationship. GAI International Academic Conferences, Praha,

Czech Republic.

Senge, P. (2007). Beşinci disiplin [The fifth discipline] (A. İldeniz & A. Doğukan, Trans.).

Yapı Kredi Yayınları.

Tekbulut, G. (2021). Üniversitelerde liderlik stilleri, örgütsel vatandaşlık davranışı ve

akademik performans arasındaki ilişkinin bazı değişkenler bakımından incelenmesi [An

examination of the relationship between leadership styles, organizational citizenship

behavior, and academic performance in universities in terms of certain variables]

[Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Hacettepe University.

Turan, E.& Şahin, M.Y. (2016). Yönetim ve kamu yönetiminin genel nitelikleri [General

characteristics of management and public administration]. In E. Turan (Ed.), Kamu

yönetimi [Public administration] (pp. 15-72). Palet Yayınları.

Ünsal, H. (2016, November 24–25). Türk yükseköğretim sisteminin son kalkınma planına

göre analizi [Analysis of the Turkish higher education system according to the latest

development plan]. Paper presented at the International Conference on Quality in Higher

Education (ICQH), Sakarya, Turkey.

Yıldırım, E. (2006). Örgütsel öğrenmenin öncülü olarak örgütsel zekâ: Teori ve bir

uygulama [Organizational intelligence as a precursor to organizational learning: Theory

and an application]. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Selçuk University.

Yılmaz, M. (2016). Okul yöneticilerinin yönetim tarzlarının sosyo- demografik faktörleri

bağlamında incelenmesi: Kadın yöneticiler üzerinde bir araştırma [An examination of

school administrators’ management styles in the context of sociodem]. 21. Yüzyılda

Eğitim ve Toplum, 5(15), 293314.