|
|
|
|
Article 3: Program Management Practices of Extension Managers In the Central Province of Iran Mohammad Chizari, Associate Professor Tarbiat Modarres University Tehran, Iran Ahmad Mohseni, Ph.D. Student Tehran University Karaj, Iran Abstract Perceptions of extension agents regarding programming and management practices of their managers in the Central Province of Iran were determined. Agents felt managers involved them in planning and implementing programs. However, agents reported that managers did not facilitate them with necessary resources so they could be able to inform farmers about programs and program objectives. Managers were perceived to have consideration for agents, but were less effective due to a lack of authority in personnel, budget, and fiscal matters. Study recommendations included greater involvement of farmers and managerial authority commensurate with responsibilities. Introduction For the most part, extension systems in developing countries, and several developed countries, are organized in the government sector and housed within a technical ministry or department, usually agriculture. Swanson (1990) indicated that 90% of extension work follows this pattern. Fashioned as a government bureaucracy, government-organized extension systems subscribe to and practice centralized, top-down management and control in the planning and implementation of extension programs. Hierarchical structures and controlling management styles are the norm; decentralization is uncommon and democratic management styles convey a sense of weak, incapable leadership (Van den Ban & Hawkins, 1988). Inadequate resources add to the problem situation. UNDP (1991) reported that ministry-based extension systems in developing countries do not have adequate financial resources to attract high quality personnel and support basic operations. Consequently, extension staffs in these systems lack needed job competencies and motivation (Swanson, 1997). Swanson also maintained that extension systems generally do not have a well-defined system of human resource management to keep personnel trained and professionally competent. Van den Ban and Hawkins (1988) suggested that the practice of choosing extension managers for technical competence rather than for management training and skills contribute to system inefficiencies. Mohseni (1994) found that most extension agents in Iran do not have a BS degree. On the other hand most extension managers in Iran hold a technical agriculture degree at the BS level and often receive in-service training in extension and personnel management. Karami (1982) argued that when developing country extension systems fail to accomplish goals it is not that the personnel are not familiar with the philosophy and working concepts of extension work. A major cause is the way they are organized and managed. The extension service in Iran mimics other developing country extension systems in organization and management philosophy, and experience. Similarly, World Bank (1994) stated that even though extension staff in Iran is relatively well qualified but the organization and management are inadequate. Mohseni (1994) studied extension managers in the Central Province of Iran and found that they lacked confidence and understanding in developing and implementing extension activities. He recommended routine evaluation of managers= work performance in the interest of overall development of extension personnel and programs. This study of the views of extension agents in the Central Province of Iran regarding program management practices of their managers is intended to complement the above studies and add to our knowledge of this important field of work. Extension system at various levels At National level. The Ministry of Agriculture is responsible for all services related to crops and on- farm water use. The MOA has nine departments and employs about 7300 higher level staff in Tehran, of whom about 80 for extension, 90 for training and 2300 for research. Budgets for extension have increased substantially since 1985. At Provincial level. The Provincial Director- General for agriculture is responsible to the deputy Minister, planning and budgeting for all agricultural development in the Province. The Director of Agricultural Extension (DAE) is appointed by the DG of the Extension Organization in Tehran (Capital City of Iran). Tehran provides an annual indicative work program and budget, but the implementation and coordination with other institutions is the responsibility of DAE. The DAE reports to the Deputy DG Technical (Province). However, the agricultural Service Centers, and all extension staff, report to the Deputy DG Execution. At Local Level (Township and Villages). A director of agriculture is appointed in each township and is assisted by a deputy, together with a technical service head, under whom there are sections for extension plant protection and agricultural engineering. At the villages level there about 800 Agricultural Service Centers or Agricultural Extension Offices. Extension (and other, technical staff) report to the ASC manager for administrative purposes only. For all technical matters they report back to their own services at Shahrestan and Provincial level. Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine the perceptions of extension agents in the Central Province of Iran regarding performance of selected program management tasks by their managers. Specific objectives of the study were to determine perceptions of extension agents regarding: 1. Program planning practices followed by extension managers; 2. Program implementation practices followed by extension managers; 3. The consideration style of extension managers; 4. Authority patterns in the extension organization. Population The population of this study included all extension agents (N=72) in the Central Province of Iran. The extension organization directory of the Ministry of Agriculture was used to locate the agents. The researchers verified the list before mailing the survey. Research Design and Data Analysis The research design used for this study was a descriptive survey method. The survey instrument had two sections. The first section included demographic data on agents. The second section comprised managerial task statements with a 3-point Likert-type response scale. Content and face validity were established by a panel of faculty and graduate students in the Department of Agricultural Extension and Education at Tarbiat Modarres University, Tehran, and extension specialists in the Ministry of Agriculture. The instrument was pilot tested with 10 extension agents in Tehran Province two weeks prior to the study, and needed modifications made. Reliability of the practice statements taken together was .86 (Cronbach=s alpha). Data were collected from extension agents by mail. First-round non-respondents were sent a post card reminder. Where this did not elicit a response, follow-up letters with another questionnaire were mailed. The final response rate was 94.4% (68 out of 72). Responses from the two mailings were statistically compared on key variables relating to demographics and program management practices of extension managers. Chi-square and one-way ANOVA statistical analyses found no statistically significant difference (p q.05) between early and laterespondents. According to Miller and Smith (1983), late respondents may be used as a proxy for the profile of non-respondents. Therefore, it was concluded that non-respondents were similar to respondents. Results Demographic Characteristics Forty-six percent of the respondents had a high school diploma, 43% had an associate degree in agriculture, and only 4% had a BS degree. Fifty percent of extension agents were between the age of 25 to 35 years old. The majority (71%) of respondents had 1 to 5 years of work experience in the Ministry of Agriculture as an extension agent. When asked why they have chosen their present occupation as their career, 44% indicated that they were personally interested in the agriculture. All respondents were male. Objective 1 Table 1 shows the perceptions of extension agents regarding program planning practices followed by managers. Slightly more than half of respondents indicated that to a large extent extension managers inform agents about the general goals of the extension organization (57.4%), involve them in developing goals and preparing extension programs (61.2%), and prioritize extension objectives and programs (50.8%). On the other hand, most respondents (93.8%) indicated that managers do not facilitate resources for agents to inform farmers about extension programs and objectives. Objective 2 Table 2 gives the perceptions of extension agents regarding program implementation practices of managers. Most agents (86.6%) reported that long-and short- term programs were well coordinated, that there was considerable flexibility in program implementation (76.1%), and that extension programs met to a large extent or somewhat the needs of farmers (85.6%). On the other hand, a majority of agents indicated that budgets were inadequate for implementing programs (68.2%), and that program implementation was inappropriately or only somewhat appropriately timed (62.7%). Objective 3 Table 3 shows the perceptions of extension agents regarding the consideration style of managers. Consideration style in management reflects a personal and professional concern for subordinates, and involvement in operational tasks and decisions. Managers got high marks for involving and using the skills and knowledge of agents in planning and implementing programs (91.0%), clarifying extension policy to employees (81.6%), and caring for the education needs of agents (74.6%). However, agents felt that managers were not caring of the personal needs of agents and living situations, as many as 80.9% indicating little or some care. Objective 4 Table 4 indicates the perceptions of agents regarding authority patterns in the extension organization with respect to managers. The data show that extension managers are not perceived having much authority in the organization. Over three-fourths of the agents felt that managers had little or only some authority in recruiting and rewarding employees, managing their budgets, and purchasing equipment. Consequently, nearly three- fourths of the agents felt that authority given to managers was not or only somewhat commensurate with job responsibilities. Table 1 Perceptions of Extension Agents in the Central Province of Iran Regarding Program Planning Practices Followed by Managers Practices Extent followed n % Inform extension agents about the general goals of the extension organization. Little Somewhat Very much 2 27 39 2.9 39.7 57.4 Involve extension agents in developing goals and preparing extension programs. Little Somewhat Very much 18 18 41 26.9 26.9 61.2 Prioritize extension objectives and programs. Little Somewhat Very much 10 23 34 14.9 34.3 50.8 Facilitate agents with needed resources to inform farmers about extension programs and objectives. Little Somewhat Very much 28 33 4 43.0 50.8 6.2 ConclusionsExtension managers are perceived by extension agents to involve them as stakeholders in planning and implementing programs. This conclusion is supported by the finding that extension managers to a large extent informed agents about general extension goals, involved them in developing goals and prioritizing objectives, and coordinated long- and short-term programs. Extension managers are not facilitating agents with the resources necessary so they could inform farmers about extension programs and program objectives. In many parts of Iran only a small proportion of farmers are regularly visited by extension agents and on some of their problems they find it very difficult to get any advise at all (World Bank, 1994). It is worthy to note that programs are perceived as meeting, to a large degree, the needs of farmers. This conclusion contradicts the accepted extension tenet that farmer involvement is crucial to program success. In this study, the program is perceived to be successful, yet farmers are not informed about programs. Extension managers engage in an employee-centered management style, but their effectiveness is impaired by a top-down authority pattern. This conclusion is supported by the finding that managers cared for agents in work-related areas (but not personal aspects), and involved them in planning and implementing programs. However, they were perceived by agents to lack managerial authority in personnel, fiscal, and budget matters. Röling (1992) has blamed lack of managerial freedom to recruit and terminate personnel, and to reward outstanding performance as some of the barriers to effective extension work in developing countries. Table 4 Perceptions of Extension Agents in the Central Province of Iran of Authority Patterns in the Extension Organization Practices Extent followed n % Local extension organization plans and conducts its own programs. Little Somewhat Very much 22 33 12 32.8 49.3 17.9 Managers have authority to hire and fire personnel. Little Somewhat Very much 35 18 13 53.0 27.3 19.7 Managers have authority to distribute and organize their own budget. Little Somewhat Very much 20 25 23 29.4 36.8 33.8 Managers have authority to purchase materials and equipment needed to implement the extension programs. Little Somewhat Very much 20 28 19 29.4 41.8 28.3 Managers have authority to reward employees. Little Somewhat Very much 47 13 7 70.2 19.4 10.4 Level of authority is commensurate with task responsibilities. Little Somewhat Very much 20 28 19 29.9 41.8 28.3 Recommendations 1. Managers should facilitate agents with resources so they could inform farmers to a greater extent about extension programs. 2. Adequate budgets should be provided so extension managers can plan realistic programs and extension agents can implement programs needed by farmers. 3. Extension activities should be appropriately timed around the farmer=s schedule. Obviously, if farmers are involved in all steps of planning extension activities this kind of problem will not occur. 4. Authority should be given to managers to reward employees, manage their budgets, and purchase equipment. Managers cannot help meet the personal needs of agents and motivate them if they do not have any authority. References Karami, E. (1982). An investigation of effective factors hindering the success of extension agents. Extension Organization of Iran. Miller, L. E., & Smith, K. L. (1983). Handling nonresponse issues. Journal of Extension, 21(5), 45- 50. Mohseni, A. (1994). An investigation of extension managers characteristics and their knowledge of management from the viewpoints of extension agents in the Central Province, Iran. Unpublished master=s thesis, Tarbiat Modarres University, Tehran, Iran. Röling, N. (1992, October). Facilitating sustainable agriculture: Turning policy models upside down. Paper presented at IIED/IDS Conference, Brighton. Shahbazi, E. (1993). Development and rural extension. Tehran, Iran: Center for Tehran University Publication. Swanson, B. E. (Ed). (1990). Report of the global consultation on agricultural extension. Rome: FAO. Swanson, B. E. (Ed). (1997). Improving agricultural extension: A reference manual. Rome: FAO. UNDP (1991). Agricultural Extension. New York: UNDP. Van den Ban, A. W., & Hawkins, H. S. (1988). Agricultural extension. Essex, England: Longman Scientific and Technical. World Bank (1994). Islamic Republic of Iran Services for Agriculture and Rural Development. New York: Agriculture Operations Division.
|
|
Send mail to ebrahimy_m@yahoo.com with questions or comments about this web site.
|