Site Loader

1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY

This study looks at public institutions, from the perception of internal executive, middle and lower management that directly and indirectly manage the teaching and research and councils at public institutions of higher learning in Namibia. It excludes private institutions that offer higher learning in Namibia. In Namibia, many private institutions of higher learning are registered with the Namibia Qualifications Authority such as the International University of Management and Lingua College (Namibia Qualification Authority, 2017).

The current and/or potential employers, like government, the private sector and parastatals were excluded from this study. If the perception of these current and/or potential employers could be assessed, the outcome of this study would most probably be different.

The study only looks at leadership holistically as a dependant variable on organisational transformation of public institutions of higher learning in Namibia. This study excludes factor analysis such as ethnicity, gender and generation composition and African perspective on leadership. This study only samples the councils, executive, middle and lower management of the academic cadre; which may raise the issue of self-perception that may impact the conclusions to be drawn.

The recommendations and findings cannot be generalised to private institutions of higher learning in Namibia. The main concern was the level of trust the researcher can place on the data collected. This concern is derived from the fact that only the Vice-Chancellor and Deputy-Vice-Chancellors: Academic and Research at NUST and the Vice-Chancellor and Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Academic and the Pro Vice Chancellor Innovation, Research and Development at UNAM were sampled from the executive management. The deans as representatives of middle management, who manage academic faculties were sampled. Only the chairpersons of councils were sampled as representing external stakeholders. The representatives from the SRC on Councils were sampled. If all stakeholders, such as the administrative staff, students, employers or potential employers of graduates and alumni of these two public institutions could be part of the sample of this study, this could potentially change the outcome of this study, as the various stakeholders may have different opinions, thereby changing the analysis and ultimately the conclusions of this study. This study, however, could not sample all the subpopulations because it was impractical and uneconomical.

Post Author: admin