การยอมตามอำนาจผู้บังคับบัญชาของบุคลากรในมหาวิทยาลัยขอนแก่น : การศึกษาเฉพาะกรณี / ทวีชัย บุญเติม = Compliance to supervisor's power by personnel in Khon Kaen University : a case study / Thaveechai Bunterm
Purpose of the study The purpose of this research was to study the five bases of power which make Khonkaen University's personnel to comply and to compare the bases of power which make the personnel of different function categories, academic field, sizes of academic departments and equivalent, degrees held, and working experiences to comply; and finally to study correlations between the power bases and work satisfaction of personnel in each function categories. The five bases of power, according to French and Raven, include Reward power, Coercive power, Legitimate power, Referent power, and Expert power. Hypotheses 1. Personnel of different function categories have different compliance to each of the power base. 2. Personnel of different academic fields have different compliance to each of the power base. 3. Personnel of different academic department sizes and equivalent had different compliance to each of the power base. 4. Personnel of different academic degrees had different compliance to each of the power base. 5. Personnel of different working experiences had different compliance to each of the power base. Methodology This study used the survey approach. The samples used in the study were 945 Khonkaen University faculty members, academic supporting staffs, and general service and administrative staffs. The study was done during the first semester of 1983 academic year. The questionnaire used as tool in the research was adapted from Suchada Kornperpanee’s Power Bases Scale which was based on French and Raven's theory of bases of social power, and questionnaire on work satisfaction was adaped from Smith, Dendall and Hulin’s Job Description Index. Analysis of data used , S.D., ANOVA, Newman Kuels’ test for multiple comparison, and The Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficients. Research Findings 1. Personnel of every group complied to Expert Power the most. Next in the order of compliance was Legitimate Power. For the rest of power bases, some group complied to some power bases. Others complied to all power bases, while the majority were against Coercive Power. 2. There were significant differences among faculty members, academic supporting staffs, and general service and administrative staffs for the four following power bases: Reward Power, Coercive Power, Legitimate Power, and Expert Power. 3. Personnel of different academic fields had significant difference in compliance to three power bases, i.e. Reward Power, Coercive Power, and Legitimate Power. 4. Personnel of different academic department sizes had significant difference in compliance to every power base, i.e. Coercive Power and Legitimate Power. 5. Personnel of different academic degrees had significant difference in compliance to every power base, i.e. Reward Power, Coercive Power, Legitimate Power, Referent Power, and Expert Power. 6. Personnel with different length of service to Khonkaen University and significant difference in compliance to only one power base, i.e. Legitimate Power. 7. Personnel of different function categories had significant difference in work satisfaction according to four dimensions, i.e. satisfaction with work, supervisor, income, and promotion within personnel of function category A. (instructor, assistant professor, associate professor and professor) which showed highest mean, 8. Results of the study on correlation between power bases and work satisfaction showed that 8.1 Coercive power of total personnel and personnel with in function category C. (general service and administrative staffs) had significant negative correlation with satisfaction with work at the .01 level, while that of personnel within function Category B. (academic supporting staff ) had significant negative correlation with satisfaction with work at the .05 level. 8.2 Legitimate power of total personnel had significant negative correlation with work satisfaction at the .05 level. 8.3 Referent power of personnel within function Category C. had significant positive correlation with satisfaction with work at the .05 level. 8.4 Expert power of personnel within function Categories A. and C. and total personnel had significant correlation with satisfaction with work at the .01 level.
