CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE: AN AUTOETHNOGRAPHY OF LEADING AN EXTERNAL CAMPUS IN A STATE UNIVERSITY

Authors

  • Hanlie A. Taha Palawan State University (PSU) Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, Philippines

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v7.i9s.2026.8048

Keywords:

Autoethnography, Higher Education Leadership, Multi-Campus Governance, Bureaucratic Leadership, Philippine State Universities And Colleges

Abstract [English]

This autoethnographic study explores leadership in external campuses of a Philippine State University and College (SUC) system through my lived experiences across multiple administrative roles over two decades. Serving at different points as a founding campus director, campus director, dean of south campuses, and cluster dean, I experienced leadership from shifting positional vantage points within a multi-level governance structure marked by centralized authority, limited autonomy, resource scarcity, and overlapping jurisdictions. These roles allowed me to witness how policies are interpreted, negotiated, and enacted across institutional layers and local contexts. Using reflective narratives, memory work, and analytic memoing as primary sources of data, I examined how leadership is practiced in everyday administrative life. Five interrelated themes emerged: navigating multi-level governance and policy tensions; strategic adaptation and problem-solving leadership; relational leadership and stakeholder engagement; identity building and campus culture formation; and leadership resilience and professional wisdom. The findings reveal that leadership in external campuses is not merely administrative or procedural but deeply relational, adaptive, and symbolic. Directors function as boundary-spanning actors who translate centralized mandates into locally meaningful practices while sustaining institutional legitimacy and campus identity. By situating personal experience within broader organizational structures, this study contributes to higher education leadership and governance scholarship in the Philippine context. It demonstrates how leadership agency is exercised within bureaucratic constraints and underscores the importance of recognizing external campus leadership as central to equitable and inclusive higher education.

References

Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. Jossey-Bass.

Blau, P. M. (1955). The dynamics of bureaucracy. University of Chicago Press.

Blau, P. M. (1970). A formal theory of differentiation in organizations. American Sociological Review, 35(2), 201–218. https://doi.org/10.2307/2093199 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2093199

Bolden, R., Petrov, G., & Gosling, J. (2009). Distributed leadership in higher education: Rhetoric and reality. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(2), 257–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143208100301 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143208100301

Clark, B. R. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. University of California Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520340725

Deem, R., Hillyard, S., & Reed, M. (2007). Knowledge, higher education, and the new managerialism. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199265909.001.0001

DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101

Etzioni, A. (1964). Modern organizations. Prentice-Hall.

Hood, C. (1995). The “new public management” in the 1980s: Variations on a theme. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 20(2–3), 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(93)E0001-W DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(93)E0001-W

Kalberg, S. (1980). Max Weber’s types of rationality: Cornerstones for the analysis of rationalization processes in history. American Journal of Sociology, 85(5), 1145–1179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/227128

Middlehurst, R. (2013). Changing internal governance: Are leadership roles and management structures in United Kingdom universities fit for the future? Higher Education Quarterly, 67(3), 275–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12018 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12018

Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations. Prentice Hall.

Tight, M. (2014). Collegiality and managerialism: A false dichotomy? Tertiary Education and Management, 20(4), 294–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2014.956788 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2014.956788

Walode, R. G. (2025). An Analytical Study of the Relationship Between Risk Management Aand Financial Performance. ShodhPrabandhan: Journal of Management Studies. 2(2), 93–100. https://doi.org/10.29121/ShodhPrabandhan.v2.i2.2025.55 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29121/ShodhPrabandhan.v2.i2.2025.55

Weber, M. (1947). The theory of social and economic organization (T. Parsons, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1922

Downloads

Published

2026-05-11

How to Cite

Taha, H. A. (2026). CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE: AN AUTOETHNOGRAPHY OF LEADING AN EXTERNAL CAMPUS IN A STATE UNIVERSITY. ShodhKosh: Journal of Visual and Performing Arts, 7(9s), 404–412. https://doi.org/10.29121/shodhkosh.v7.i9s.2026.8048