Exploring and explaining the clusters of migrant faculty members of top Iranian universities based on factor analysis of their perceptions of barriers to human capital retention

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 PhD candidate in human resources management, Department of Management, Faculty of Administrative and Economic Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

2 Associate professor at Department of Management, Faculty of Administrative and Economic Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

3 Full professor at Department of Management, Faculty of Administrative and Economic Sciences, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

Abstract

Abstract
Retaining the talented academicians is a troubling and worrying phenomenon in most developing countries, including Iran; hence, exploring the barriers to retention of the talented academicians of top Iranian universities can provide one of the infrastructures for improving their effective retention. Having taken the interdisciplinary and multifaceted nature of the subject into consideration, the present paper aims to investigate the various aspects of executive, administrative, academic, educational, economic, and social, at both individual and organizational levels, and from both micro and macro dimensions. Data collection was conducted via concourse development in Q methodology for the barriers to their retention, and the Q-sample was introduced to the participants, i.e. the former faculty members of top 20 Iranian universities who have emigrated to top 100 universities of the world. Factor extraction and factor rotation revealed that there exist seven types of perceptions among former Iranian faculty members on barriers at organization level against their retention in their source universities in Iran. Analysis of each cluster of perceptions based on employee retention in human resource management and along with the demographic characteristics of the individuals in each cluster was the main contribution of this quali-quantitative study.
Introduction
    The present paper aims to explore a typology of perceptions of Iranian faculty members about the barriers to their retention in their source universities; through a Q-methodology approach, a list of various barriers, including executive, administrative, academic, economic, and social, at organizational level and mainly from micro organization dimensions, is presented to the emigrated faculty members of selected Iranian top universities, in order to explore their perceptions regarding which barriers hindered their stay in their source universities. Analysis of each explored perception type, with regard to retention function in human resource management and along with the demographic characteristics of the individuals in each cluster is the main contribution of this paper.
Case study
    The number of participants who accepted to take part in this study was 17 of the former faculty members of top 20 Iranian universities who have emigrated to top 100 universities abroad, whose demographic characteristics (e.g. gender, age, major, and department in their source university) were also provided. Selection of the top universities was based on the world university ranking systems of QS, Laiden, and Shanghai 2015, and a total number of 100 Q-cards were sorted and submitted using an online Q-study tool developed by the authors.
Materials and Methods
    The present research applied a Q-methodology approach. After developing the concourse (Q-items), the Q-sorting was performed on a 9-point Likert scale by the participants. Factor extraction, factor rotation, and factor analysis were performed using PQmethod and SPSS v.18 software, and the interpretation of factors was carried out with regard to qualitative explanations provided by the participants, as well as their demographic characteristics.  To measure the content validity of this Q-study (Dennis, 1988), the first draft of the concourse was reviewed and revised by a number of the participants and their comments were applied to the final Q-items prior to getting presented to all participants for Q-sorting. The reliability of this study was also measured through test-retest: the Q-sorting was administered to 4 of the participants (23% of the total) twice, with a 1-month gap in-between the tests, and the correlation coefficient was estimated as  87% , showing a good reliability for this Q study (Brown 1980).
Discussion and Results
    According to the Q analysis of the attitudes of the former faculty members of top Iranian universities about the barriers against their retention in their source organizations, the seven clusters of perceptions were extracted and the following typology was provided:
1-Perception Type I) Strong believers in effect of educational barriers, strong disbelievers in effect of political barriers: "Disbelievers in effect of retention function"
2-Perception Type II) Firm believers in effect of economic barriers, strong disbelievers in effect of executive barriers, strong believers in effect of academic barriers: "Believers in effect of retention function"
3-Perception Type III) Firm disbelievers in effect of economic barriers, strong disbelievers in effect of administrative barriers
4-Perception Type IV) Strong believers in effect of macro organizational barriers (esp. the administrative ones)
5-Perception Type V) Disbelievers in effect of academic barriers, disbelievers in effect of macro organizational barriers (except for administrative ones)
6-Perception Type VI) Strong disbelievers in effect of micro academic barriers
7-Perception Type VII) Uncertain and neutral
    Among these explored clusters, faculty members with Type II perception, including individuals below the age of 40 years and from non-engineering fields, believed the most firmly in influence of micro-organizational barriers as a cause for their emigration, and thus, for retention initiatives, can be targeted at the highest priority. On the other hand, Perception Type I, including faculty members above the age of 40 years and largely from humanities fields, are strong believers in the effectiveness of fundamental educational barriers that cannot be removed at organization-level management for their retention. Nevertheless, all the studied faculty members shared the common perception as "Believers in the effectiveness of campus climate, firm disbelievers in the effectiveness of political barriers, and strong disbelievers in the effectiveness of educational barriers".
Conclusion
    To conclude this paper, since the studied faculty members shared the common perception as believers in the effectiveness of campus climate on their retention, the managers of universities can reduce the barriers to retention of their talented faculty members, in general, by providing a more favorable campus climate, while, in particular, taking into account the existence of varying perceptions among their faculty members.

Keywords

References

1-Abbasi, H. (2013). A study of brain drain & analysis of the quantitative aspects of experts' emigration from Iran. The MSRT Institute for Research & Planning, Tehran. (In Persian)
2-Abbasi, S., & Hollman, K. (2000). Turnover: the real bottom line. Public Personnel Management, 29(3), 333-347.
3-Adams, Jr., and Richard H. (2003). International migration, remittances and the brain drain: a study of 24 labor – exporting countries. World Bank Development Research Group, Working Paper Series No. 6.
4-Aliabadi, A. (2002). Brain drain in the age of globalization. Iranian Journal of National Studies, 14, 1-23. (In Persian)
5-Askari, H., Cummings, J. T., & Izbudak, M. (1977). Iran's migration of skilled labor to the United States. Iranian Studies, 10, 1-21.
6-Bataille, G.M., & Brown, B.E. (2006). Faculty career paths: multiple routes to academic success & satisfaction. Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT.
7-Bayat, N., Badri, S. A., Rezvani, M. R., & Faraji, H. A. (2014). Meta-analysis on rural tourism studies in Iran: a Q-Methodology research. Journal of Research & Rural Planning, 3(7), 85-99. (In Persian)
8-Bildirici, M., et al. (2005). Determents of human capital theory, growth, & brain drain: an econometric analysis for 77 countries. Applied Econometrics & International Development, 5 (2), 109-140.
9-Blackburn, R. T., & Lawrence, J. H. (1995). Faculty at work: motivation, expectation, satisfaction. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.
10-Boxall, P., Purcell J., & Wright, P. (2007). Oxford Handbook of Human Resource Management. Oxford University Press, London.
11-Brown, S. R. (1993). A primer on Q methodology. Operant Subjectivity, 16, 91-138.
12-Claybon, K. M. (2008). The relationship between job satisfaction & selected demographic & teacher retention. (Doctoral Dissertation, Texas Southern University), available from ProQuest Dissertation & Thesis database, (UMI No. 3447329).
13-Danaiefard, H., Hosseini, S. Y., and Sheikhha, R. (2013). Q-methodology: theoretical framework and guidelines for research & practice. Saffar Publications, Tehran. (In Persian)
14-De Haas, H. (2010). Migration & development: a theoretical perspective. International Migration Review, 44(1), 227-264.
15-Dennis, K. (1988). Q-methodology: new perspectives on estimating reliability and validity, In O.L. Strickland & C.F.  Waltz (Eds.), Measuring nursing performance: practice, education, and research. Springe, New York, Vol. 2, 409-419.
16-Docquier, F., Lowell, B. L., & Marfouk, A. (2009). A gendered assessment of highly skilled emigration. Population & Development Review, 35(2), 297-321.
17-Dole, C., & Schroeder, R. (2001). The impact of various factors on the personality, job satisfaction & turnover intentions of professional accountants. Managerial Auditing Journal, 16(4), 234-245.
18-Fartoukzadeh, H.R., & Eshraghi, H. (2008). Dynamic modelling of brain drain with emphasis on the role of higher education, Iranian Journal of Research & Planning in Higher Education, 50, 139-168. (In Persian)
19-Funk, J. A. (1993). An analysis of factors & teacher perceived variables that affect attrition & retention of teachers. (Doctoral Dissertation, Temple University), available from ProQuest Dissertation & Thesis database, (UMI No. 9316480)
20-Ghaneierad, M. A. (2004). Social issues of imbalanced growth in higher education, graduates' unemployment & elites' emigration. Iranian Journal of Social Welfare, 15, 167-208. (In Persian)
21-Gholipour, A. & Roshandel, T. (2010). Talent management: malfunctions of mass media in exacerbating the brain drain. Iranian Journal of Management Research, 3(8), 19-35. (In Persian)
22-Giannoccolor, P. (2004). The brain drain: a survey of the literature. Working Paper 20060302, University of Milano-Bicocca.
23-Hancock, J. I., Allen, D. G., Bosco, F. A., McDaniel, K. R., Pierce, C. A. (2013). Meta-analytic review of employee turnover as a predictor of firm performance. Journal of Management, 39(3), 1-23.
24-Hayes, L. J., O'Brien-Pallas, L., Duffiled, C., Shamian, J., Buchan, J., Hughes, F., Spence, H. K., North, N., & Stone, P. W. (2006). Nurse turnover: a literature review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 43, 237–263.
25-Herzog, N. B. (2010). Keeping the ones you want: a study of faculty satisfaction & faculty retention in higher education. (Doctoral dissertation, Capella University).
26-Horri, H. R., Jalaie, S.A., & Hamzehnejad, N. (2015). Investigating the effect of brain drain on foreign business and trade using computable general equilibrium model. Iranian Journal of Theories in Economics, 2(1), 25-45. (In Persian)
27-Inkson K., Carr, S. C., Edwards, M., Hooks, J., Jackson, D., Thorn, K., et al. (2004). From brain drain to talent flow: views of Kiwi expatriates. University of Auckland Business Review, 6(2), 1-19.
28-Karimi, N., & Gharaati, S. (2013). Why do brains drain? brain drain in Iran's political discourse. The MSRT Sadaad Journal, 6(2), 154-173. (In Persian).
29-Khoshgouyanfard, A.R. (2007). Q-methodology, The IRIB Publication, Tehran. (In Persian)
30- Mirbagheri, M.H. and Davami, P. (2006). Brain drain: causes and incentives. Iranian Journal of Engineering Education, 31, 1-25. (In Persian)
31-Natarajan, R, and Ganeshbabu, K. (1994). The Nature and scope of the brain drain of engineering graduates. International Journal of Engineering Education, 10(1), 114-123
32-Ongori, H. (2007). A review of the literature on employee turnover. African Journal of Business Management, 1(3), 49-54.
33-Pahlavan, M. (2014). The new immigrant: a comparison of the factors contributing to upper-class status among non-Hispanic groups in the U.S. (Doctoral Dissertation, Howard University).
34-Salehiomran, E. (2006). Investigating the perceptions of faculty members on the causes of brain drain from Iran: case of Mazandaran University. Social Sciences Letters, 28, 56-80. (In Persian)
35-Shahbazi, M. (2014). Academic elites' emigration in the globalization age. Neda Aryana Publication, Tehran. (In Persian)
36-Shahramnia, A. M., & Eskandari, M. (2004). Investigation of the influential factors on the brain drain: a case study of Iran. Journal of Political Contributions, 16, 1-26. (In Persian)
37-Shahramnia, A. M., & Eskandari, M. (2007). Dimensions, causes, & consequences of the brain drain from margins to the center: a case study of Iran. Journal of Political Contributions, 25, 36-51. (In Persian)
38-Sparrow, P. R., & Gaston, K. (1996). Generic climate maps: a strategic application of climate survey data. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17(6), 679-698.
39-Tahmasbi, R., Gholipour, A., & Javaherizadeh, E. (2012). Talent management: investigating & prioritizing the factors affecting the attraction & retention of academic talents. Iranian Journal of Public Management Research, 5(17), 5-26. (In Persian)
40-Taleghani, G., Salmani, D., and Taatian, A. (2010). Survey of leadership styles in different cultures. Iranian Journal of Management Studies, 3(3), 91-111.
41-Tavakol, M., & Erfanmanesh, I. (2014). Qualitative meta-analysis of research articles on brain drain in Iran. Iranian Social Studies, 5(1), 45-75. (In Persian)
42-Zakersalehi, G. R. (2006). Meta-analysis of studies on brain drain & initiatives for the elites' retention. Journal of Iranian Sociology, 8(1), 113-135. (In Persian)

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics