By
Hadjar Moeini Shahraki
The aim of this study was survey of relationship between organizational structure types and administrators’ power resources at Shiraz University’s administration division. The statistical population were personnel of shiraz university’s administration division in the year of 1389-90 that 243 persons were selected with simple proportional classifications sampling method. Tow Scales were used: Organizational Structure Types (Torkzadeh & Mohtaram, 2011) and Power Resources Identification (Torkzadeh & Moeini, 2010) which were distributed and collected after calculation of validity and reliability. The results followed of independent t test showed that The dominant organizational structure Type in the research scope was enabling structure. In addition, the results abtioned of repeated measures variance analyze indicated that the priority of administrators’ using power resources was as follows: reward, environmental dominance, expert, referent, coercive, ethic, legitimate, culture and information. also The results gained of multivariable regression revealed that enabling structure was a significant positive anticipant of environmental dominance, expert, referent, ethic, legitimate and information power resources and it was a significant negative anticipant of reward, coercive and culture power resources. hindering structure was a significant positive anticipant of reward, coercive and culture power resources and it was a significant negative anticipant of environmental dominance, expert, referent, ethic, legitimate and information power resources.
Key words: Organizational Structure, Power Resources, Enabling Structure, Hindering Structure, University.

Shiraz University
Faculty of Education and Psychology
M.A. Thesis in Educational Administration
A Survey of Relationship Between Organizational Structure Types and Administrators’ Power Resources at Shiraz University’s Administration division
By
Hadjar Moeini Shahraki
Supervisd By
Dr. Jafar Torkzadeh
December 2011

1. 1. Tolbert & Hall ↑

1. 1. Robbins & Judge ↑

1. 1. Saracoglu ↑

1. 1. Kim ↑

1. 1. Alanazi & Rodrigues ↑

1. 1. Hall ↑

1. 1. Hersey ↑

1. 1. Generative Causation ↑

1. 1. Activity zone ↑

1. 1. Robbins ↑

1. 1. Mccelelland & Burnham ↑

1. 1. در این پژوهش ساختار در دو نوع تواناساز و بازدارنده (هوی و سوئیتلند، ۲۰۰۰ و ۲۰۰۱) مورد توجه بوده است. ↑

1. 1. منظور از منابع قدرت، منابع نهگانه چیرگی محیطی، تخصص، مرجعیت، مشروعیت، اطلاعات، فرهنگ، اخلاق، پاداش و تنبیه (ترکزاده و همکاران، زیر چاپ) است. ↑

1. 1. Raub & Robert ↑

1. 1. Grojen ↑

1. 1. zakaro & kelimoski ↑

1. 1. Hoy & Sweetland ↑

1. 1. Hoy & Miskel ↑

1. 1. Hoy ↑

1. 1. Mcguigan ↑

1. 1. Clark ↑

1. 1. Beard ↑

1. 1. Watts ↑

1. 1. Tylus ↑

1. 1. Gage ↑

1. 1. French & Raven ↑

1. 1. Rollinson & Broadfield ↑

1. 1. Etzioni ↑

1. 1. Richmond & Mccroskey ↑

1. 1. Raven & Kruglanski ↑

1. 1. Referent ↑

1. 1. Expert ↑

1. 1. Legitimate ↑

1. 1. Reward ↑

1. 1. Coercive ↑

1. Information ↑