Campus Autonomy and Its Relationship to Measures of University Quality.
To what extent should organizational control be centralized and to what extent should local managers have authority to operate their institutions without external regulation? This question has emerged as one of the most important issues of the 1980s and is under active review by corporations, governments, and multi-campus systems. State and federal funds for many universities have been accompanied by regulations aimed at cost containment [8,18,31]. Taxpayer and legislative demands for accountability and control have conspired, according to some observers, to result in an increase in state controls, especially over public institutions of higher education [17]. The growth in regulation and control has come from many sources: legislative, executive, and judicial [20]. Multiple reviews of campus programs and budgets, overlapping agencies for approval of purchases, and redundant studies by executive and legislative committees have, at least in some states, been commonplace. In the view of state officials, a degree of fiscal regulation is necessary for cost containment and reduction of costly academic competition. In the view of most university officials, however, external control reduces campus efficiency and adaptability, as well as educational effectiveness. Despite the fact that controls are generated out of a spirit of frugality, there are costs as well as benefits. Most organizational behaviorists believe that an increase in monitoring activity increases operating