International Journal of Public Administration

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lpad20

Organizational Culture and Strategic Management

in Brazilian Public Organizations: Systematization
of Factors to Improve School Management

Pedro Henrique de Oliveira, Fernando César Almada Santos, Marco Antonio

Catussi Paschoalotto, Marcelo Seido Nagano, Elizabeth Mie Hashimoto &
Peter J. Robertson

To cite this article: Pedro Henrique de Oliveira, Fernando César Almada Santos, Marco Antonio
Catussi Paschoalotto, Marcelo Seido Nagano, Elizabeth Mie Hashimoto & Peter J. Robertson
(2022): Organizational Culture and Strategic Management in Brazilian Public Organizations:
Systematization of Factors to Improve School Management, International Journal of Public
Administration, DOI: 10.1080/01900692.2022.2069118

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2022.2069118

Published online: 30 May 2022.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lpad20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2022.2069118

Organizational Culture and Strategic Management in Brazilian Public

Organizations: Systematization of Factors to Improve School Management
Pedro Henrique de Oliveira a, Fernando César Almada Santos a, Marco Antonio Catussi Paschoalotto b
,
Marcelo Seido Nagano a, Elizabeth Mie Hashimoto c, and Peter J. Robertsond
a
Department of Production Engineering, São Carlos School of Engineering, University of São Paulo, São Carlos, Brazil; bDepartment of Public
Administration and Government, São Paulo School of Business Administration, São Paulo, Brazil; cDepartment of Mathematics Federal
Technological University of Paraná, Londrina, Brazil; dDepartment of Governance and Management, Price School of Public Policy, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, California, United States

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Drawing upon influencing factors in public organizations’ performance, this paper systematizes Brazil; organizational culture;
organizational culture and strategic management factors to improve school management. The strategic management;
team conducted a survey with 407 principals from public schools in Brazil, along with a factorial school management; public
analysis to explore the cultural and strategic management factors. The results show two factors organization
influencing school management, technical and political. More specifically, six factors influence the
process, such as planning, participation, citizen formation, innovative practices, pedagogical prac­
tices, and community participation. The conclusion points out factors and establishes elements to
provide a guide for public organizations toward improved management.

such as educational results, attention, equity, resources,

Introduction
Public organizations are important for the development
of any country. In particular, an important relationship
is found in organizational culture with strategic manage­
ment, when dealing with the long term to gauge effective
change in a better management, participation at all
organizational levels and the dissemination of values
across the organization as a whole (Corfield & Paton,
2016; Molineux, 2013). In this way, organizational cul­
ture along with strategic management aim at bringing
about change based on establishing objectives from the
communication plan and from the creation of an envir­
onment appropriate to the elaboration and execution of
that planned (Chu, 2016; Gadman, 2013; Riivari et al.,
2012).
Cultural organization can go on to influence the
process of creating the organizational strategy, as well
as relationships, communication, conflicts and use of
new technologies. As such, it aids in understanding the
practice of organizations through the explaining of par­
ticular school standards (Ng et al., 2016; Rottig, 2017)
and the relationships with other areas of organization, as
a form of global understanding (Corfield & Paton, 2016).
Therefore, cultural organizational and strategic man­
agement are important in the context of public schools.
Also, it is crucial to understand aspects of this dynamic,
policy and informational systems along with managerial
systems (World Bank, 2021). This theme is still more
important in countries such as Brazil, as education is
a theme that still needs further improvements and devel­
opment (Passador et al., 2017; PISA (Programe for
International Student Assesment), 2020).
School management can be contemplated through
a technical character or scientific-rational approach
and another, political or critical approach, to guarantee
a better organizational management (higher test scores).
The first aspect, technical factor, is aimed at the admin­
istrative nature, with the aim of the rational use of
resources to reach objectives and higher rates of effi­
ciency and efficacy (Acar & Robertson, 2004; Friedman
& Berkovich, 2020; Grissom & Loeb, 2011; Gunbayi,
2011; Horng et al., 2010; Slater, 2011). However,
the second character, policy-making factor, sees the
school as a social construct, with emphasis on social
interaction, in the pedagogical relationship and in the
democratic management of education (Libâneo, 2013;
Lück, 2009; Paro, 2008).
Therefore, one returns to the question concerning the
dilemma between the scientific-rational approach, char­
acterized as applying efficiency to cultural and organiza­
tional change in public schools (North American vision;
Destler, 2016; Gunbayi, 2011; Segal, 2012) and the

CONTACT Pedro Henrique de Oliveira Oliveiraph1@gmail.com Department of Production Engineering, São Carlos School of Engineering, University of
São Paulo, Trabalhador são-carlense Avenue, 400, Arnold Schimidt Park, 13566-590 São Carlos, São Paulo State, Brazil.
© 2022 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 P. H. OLIVEIRA ET AL.
participatory democratic approach, understood as
democratic management in school organizations
(Brazilian vision; Libâneo, 2013; Lück, 2009; Paro,
2008). In addition to the duality of educational concepts,
there are other concepts that affect school management.
One may think, also, in how an organizational
culture affects school strategic management.
Planning is one of the school administrative pillars,
which is notably marked by the elaboration and
execution of plans, under the greater responsibility
of the school principal, with the objective to define
the commitment to action, ideas developed and deci­
sions put into action (Ho et al., 2016; Lück, 2009).
Strategy aids in defining the public service offered, in
the form of change and in the search for effectiveness
based on necessary and specific adaptations of each
sector (Moullin, 2017; Wronka-Pośpiech &
Frączkiewicz-Wronka, 2016). In public schools, for
example, it affects actions for a more participatory
and effective management of education, seeking an
innovative vision of the future and the need to trans­
form the school reality (Bell, 2002).
In this manner, the two educational approaches are
not exclusive but complementary for a holistic manage­
ment toward education, that is, there is no right or
wrong, only the search for a balance so that activities
run smoothly (Libâneo, 2013; Paro, 2008). Educational
institutions, in general, play a significant role toward the
social and economic development of any country,
through use of organizational culture as the component
of its decision-making functions and as the criterion of
differentiation (Ramachandran et al., 2011). In particu­
lar, municipal public schools, obviously within the pub­
lic sector, also use organizational culture, understood
through values and beliefs that explain the conduct
practiced in these teaching and learning institutions
(Ho et al., 2016; Lück, 2009).
Thus, given the context and situation of the afore­
mentioned, it is necessary more research to under­
stand the influencing factors of manage culture and
strategy effectively. The following research question
presents itself: Which are the technical and policy
making factors of organizational culture and strategic
management that influence organizational manage­
ment? In order to respond to this question, the
objective of the article is to systematize the technical
and political factors of organizational culture that
affect the school management.
The performing of the study is justified through the need
to improve the quality and organizational management of
public municipal schools, being as they are fundamental to
the general development of society (UNICEF (United
Nations Children’s Fund), 2017; World Bank, 2018).
Furthermore, it is assumed that themes on administrative
strategic management and organizational culture are inter­
linked for the improvement of education and school man­
agement. Therefore, the scientific advance is in
understanding the factors of organizational culture and
strategic management, which affect the school
management.
The article herein, after contextualizing the intro­
duction, covers four theoretical points, those being
organizational culture, strategic management, school
management, and a relationship between the three
together. Following this, presentation is made of the
methodology that contemplates the steps used to
reach the objective. Next, the results, based on
a factorial analysis, point to technical and political
factors that influence school management. Finally,
the conclusions are presented, while considering the
practical and theoretical implications, along with the
limitations of the study.
Theoretical framework
Organizational culture
It is assumed that there is a difference in the organiza­
tional culture of educational institutions in accordance
with the countries, in which these play a role, as for
example, between the West and East (Muqadas et al.,
2017). School organizational culture is defined through
focus on thought and feeling, along with the particular
manner actions are brought out, through reinforcement of
environmental conditions that permeate it. This set of
factors goes on to influence performance, results and
learning of the students (Lück, 2009; Qubaisi et al.,
2017). In addition, organizational culture in schools
defines the use of resources and objectives, the design of
the organizational structure and the relationship between
the organizational players, as well as the relationship with
other administrative themes, such as strategy, in order that
the school functions correctly and normally (Chu, 2016;
Destler, 2016; Friedman & Berkovich, 2020; Segal, 2012).
School management can also be studied within the six
cultural dimensions of Geert Hofstede: (1) high versus low
distance of power; (2) high versus low aversion to uncer­
tainty; (3) individualism versus collectivism; (4) masculinity
versus femininity; (5) long-term versus short-term gui­
dance and (6) indulgence versus restriction (Hofstede,
2001; Hofstede et al., 2010; Minkov & Hofstede, 2011).
For this purpose, a comparative table was organized
(Chart 1) of each dimension for a better understanding of
the subject and to systematize the way in which these
concepts affect technical and political factors of public
school management.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 3

Strategic management The adoption of strategic management, by planning

in schools, involves the important role of leadership,
Strategic management encompasses the allocation of
which in many cases is put into action by the school
resources, top management decisions, differentiation
principal (Patnaik et al., 2013). Public school is funda­
and the establishing of core competencies.
mental for an understanding into organizational culture,
Additionally, define objectives, proposals, goals, plans,
given its organizational structure and relationships
policies, and course of action for the long term, setting
(Destler, 2016; Friedman & Berkovich, 2020; Gunbayi,
about achieving prior plans (Andrews, 1971; Chandler,
2011; Pavlidou & Efstathiades, 2021). American culture
1990; Prahalad & Hamel, 1990).
makes more use of the technical character, such as the
Therefore, the strategic process is summarized as ela­
use of efficiency, the adoption of strategic and opera­
boration, execution and assessment of the strategy
tional planning (strategic management) and improve­
(Thompson & Strickland III, 2003). In particular, care
ments in the decision-making process (Bell, 2002;
must be taken to ensure that there is no failure in execution
Robertson & Briggs, 1998; Segal, 2012).
by producing a major bottleneck in the strategic process.
Whereas, in Brazil, research is based more on the
Consequently, it is necessary to overcome the barriers of
political character, with the discussion of participatory
strategic planning, such as human based problems, the
democratic management of education (Lück, 2009; Paro,
process itself, structural and institutional problems
2008). It cannot be said which approach is correct, as the
(Bryson, 1988).
ideal is a balanced use between the two characters men­
Decisions made also need to be assessed. Diagnoses
tioned. In Brazilian theory, someone can join strategic
need to be performed, such as who will be involved
planning using the Political Pedagogical Plan (PPP),
(participants in their positions, participants with inter­
tactical planning using the teaching plan and operational
ests) assess the positions of the participants, choose the
planning using the class plan. However, this Brazilian
paths for the tactical decisions, set the frame for the
theoretical question covers only the pedagogical part of
problem under discussion, wait for the opportune
the school unit, leaving the strategic management by
moment and change the context (Moore, 1995).
side (Lück, 2009; De Oliveira et al., 2020).
Finally, the strategy in the public sector, including
Concerns over quality of Brazilian education is
schools, needs to be adapted. This includes greater
demonstrated in indexes that aim at evaluating if the
participation from the collaborators toward the devel­
goals and objectives of the school are met. One such
opment and implementation of the strategy being more
index is the Development Index of Basic Education
democratic, inclusive, ethical and humanistic. Another
(IDEB), which aims at assessing the performance of
important point is the role of the leader to put into
school pupils, while offering resources to schools
practice the proposed strategic plan, where the essential
(Paschoalotto et al., 2020); and the Program for
demands are good communication, initiative,
International Student Assessment (PISA). Brazilian edu­
resources, consistency and the cultural mission (Al
cation is seen as possessing low quality, which is corro­
Suwaidi et al., 2020; Carlisle, 2011; Mojibi et al., 2015;
borated by low performance of Brazilian public schools
Slack & Singh, 2018; Smollan, 2015; Suwannathat et al.,
PISA (Passador et al., 2017; PISA (Programe for
2015).
International Student Assesment), 2020).
The big question therefore is the theoretical and
practical progress in understanding school quality
School management
indexes, as PISA, in which Brazilian public education
Organizations need preparation for dealing with is still below the ideal (Paschoalotto et al., 2020; PISA
changes within the internal environment as well as the (Programe for International Student Assesment), 2020).
external environment. However, for the public sector In addition, one understands that the socioeconomic
changes are even more complicated, as many times and contextual questions also play a significant role in
these are implemented from top to bottom. This goes the dynamics of Brazilian public schools (Paschoalotto
on to produce environments without creativity and et al., 2020; Passador et al., 2017).
commitment, with searching only performed in the
short term, for immediate results and the exclusion of
Organizational culture, strategic management and
human aspects (Silva et al., 2011; Slack & Singh, 2018).
school management
Public administration is seen as time consuming, in
a way that affects communication and the transmission First, the organizational culture also influences the
of values to collaborators (Awasthy et al., 2011; Carlisle, school management, through better results of the stu­
2011; Slack & Singh, 2018). dents’ performance (Lück, 2009; Qubaisi et al., 2017).
4 P. H. OLIVEIRA ET AL.
Moreover, the organizational culture impacts into the
resources management, the strategic planning (objec­
tives and highlights), the hierarchical chart structure
and the human relations (Chu, 2016; Segal, 2012), with
a more-in-depth effect in the administrative and strate­
gic are (Destler, 2016; Friedman & Berkovich, 2020).
Second, the strategic management affects the school
management too, by the participation of the community
and employees in the strategic planning development,
with a more open and democratic approach (Carlisle,
2011; Mojibi et al., 2015; Smollan, 2015). The strategic
management could generate a better school manage­
ment through the leaders’ action with the defined stra­
tegic planning, based on good human interactions,
proactivity and resources management (Al Suwaidi
et al., 2020; Slack & Singh, 2018; Suwannathat et al.,
2015).
Third, the school management, with a strategic plan­
ning created and the organizational culture compre­
hend, could improve the school performance
(Friedman & Berkovich, 2020; Pavlidou & Efstathiades,
2021). In one side, school management, in the school’s
principal figure, needs to understand the relations and
physical structure (Destler, 2016; Gunbayi, 2011).
Complementary, a greater decision-making by the
school’s principal, could improve the school’s efficiency
(Robertson & Briggs, 1998; Segal, 2012). Therefore, it´s
important to understand which factors compose the
school’s organizational culture, strategic management,
and consequently the school management, to have
a greater school’s performance (Friedman & Berkovich,
2020; Grissom & Loeb, 2011; Gunbayi, 2011; Horng
et al., 2010; Libâneo, 2013).
Methods
Sample and procedure
The study used a survey applied to basic and fundamen­
tal school principals in the municipalities of the State of
São Paulo, Brazil. The State of São Paulo is located in
southeast Brazil, composed of 645 municipalities (11.6%
of Brazil) and 46,289,333 inhabitants (21.7% of Brazil),
with the second highest HDI and the largest economy
among the Brazilian states (IBGE (Brazilian Institute of
Geography and Statistics), 2010; Paschoalotto et al.,
2020). However, the population of schools from the
State of São Paulo possess 4,937 schools, which were
sent the questionnaires to their respective school princi­
pals via email.
The Brazilian municipalities are the responsible for
the basic and fundamental education, while the State is
for the high school and the Federal for the colleges and
universities (Paschoalotto et al., 2020). The main
responsible for the basic and fundamental schools in
the municipalities is the school principal, with the duties
of create and execute the pedagogical and administrative
strategic planning, manage the school resources, and
guarantee the community participation in the decision-
making process (Lück, 2009; Paro, 2008). Thus, the
school principal has political and technical activities to
be realized, and the strategic management and cultural
organizational are important to have a better school
management (Lück, 2009; De Oliveira et al., 2020).
In order to guarantee the representativeness of the
sample, the hierarchical cluster analysis was applied in
the 645 municipalities in the State of São Paulo based on
the variables IDEB of 2017, the FIRJAN index for
Municipal Development – Employment and income
(IFDMER) of 2016, and the Human-Municipal develop­
ment Index IDHM (IDH-M) of 2010, in a way that
generated three clusters of municipalities with different
socioeconomic profiles, and the latter with outliers
(which do not possess any of the indicators above).
Noteworthy here is that the conglomerates were
grouped by means of a multiplication score between
the three cited indices. In Figure 1A, the division of the
clusters is presented (based in the 3 cited indicators),
and in 1B, the municipalities with the collected
responses.
Hence, the generated sample reached 119 of the
municipalities (18.44% of the total), composed of 407
valid answers (8.27% of the school principal popula­
tion), distributed in 206 answers for cluster 1, 161 for
cluster 2 and 40 for cluster 3 (Figure 1B). Therefore, our
sample has school principal answers from the 3 different
clusters, it means, from 3 different socioeconomic con­
ditions in the municipalities. The cluster analysis was
realized to justify and give more relevance to our col­
lected sample.
Furthermore, the sample of school principals pos­
sesses the following characteristics: 16% masculine and
84% feminine; 86% of the schools were elementary and
14% infant teaching levels; the average age of the princi­
pals was 46.7 years; the average time in the position of
principal was 6.2 years; and all the principals had com­
pleted higher education and post-graduation.
Measures
For this study, a questionnaire based on the study on
organizational culture was used from the author Geert
Hofstede and next studies, previously presented on
Chart 1 of this study (Hofstede, 2001; Hofstede et al.,
2010; Minkov & Hofstede, 2011; Naumov & Puffer,
2001; Pheysey, 2002; Schmitz & Weber, 2014; Yoo

Figure 1. Clusters of municipalities (1A) and Municipalities with schools’ respondents (1B).
et al., 2011). Included also were questions on the strate­
gic management and school management based on the
theoretical review described at the “theoretical frame­
work” topic. The questionnaire was founded on the
Likert scale of 5 points (Hair et al., 2014). For this
study, the points vary from (1) totally agree with state­
ment A until (5) totally agree with statement B.
The questionnaire can be seen in Appendix 1 of this
study and possesses a total of 18 questions.
A preliminary pretest of the questionnaire was per­
formed, which returned the Cronbach’s alpha of 0.76.
Noteworthy here is that the questionnaire was also vali­
dated through a pretest with two specialists in public
management, two specialists in school management and
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 5
two research professors from the area (strategic admin­
istration and public organizations), and was approved
by the Ethics committee, under the number CAAE
13930719.1.0000.5390.
Data processing
In order to understand the building of constructs
between the collection variables, one can use the
factorial analysis to find elements that influence the
schools’ organizational. The data were analyzed on
the software Statistical Package for Social Science
(SPSS).
6 P. H. OLIVEIRA ET AL.

Some premises were used to realize this stage: (1) Results

general Cronbach’s alpha of 0.67, considered as
moderate and adequate, as it was above 0.60; (2)
use of the extraction by principal components (or
by factors); (3) minimum of 20 observations per
variable (in the study there were 18 variables and
407 answers); (4) significance of 0.000 (Bartlett’s
test of sphericity) and generation of the anti-image
matrix; (5) general Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO)
measure of 0.765 and minimum of 0.5 for each
variable; (6) minimum commonality of 0.5 for the
variables and (7) final cumulative percentage of
explained variance of 60.64% (Field, 2013; Hair
et al., 2014; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2012).
Initially, the information is presented for the variables, as
well as for the Cronbach’s alpha, KMO and the common­
ality of the researched elements (Table 1). One notes here
that the premises for the elaboration of the factorial
analysis were met (Field, 2013; Hair et al., 2014;
Tabachnick & Fidell, 2012). The only exception was in
relation to the variable long-term orientation 1, which was
maintained, as the other theme variable had been
excluded in the preliminary tests of the analysis factor.
Table 2 shows the formation of the factors and their
relationship with the variables selected. Therefore, six
factors were generated, namely: Factor a, with three

Table 1. Cultural dimensions of Geert Hofstede on schools.

Dimensions Low High
Power distance ● Equality in the treatment/independence of students before ● Inequality in the treatment/dependence of students on
teachers; teachers;
● Student-oriented; ● Aimed at the teacher;
● Transfer of personal truths (practice). ● Transfer of personal knowledge (theory).
Uncertainty ● Open situations and good discussions; ● Structured and rigid situations and search for the right
avoidance ● Learning that truth can be relative; answers;
● Achievements in their own abilities. ● Learning in absolute truth;
● Achievements in effort, context and learning.
Individualism ● Treatment as a group; ● Individual treatment;
● Individual initiatives discouraged; ● Individual initiatives encouraged;
● Goal of education: to understand how to do it. ● Goal of education: to understand how to learn.
Masculinity ● Social adaptation is important; ● Student performance is important;
● Average student is the norm; ● Best student is the norm;
● Basic education taught by male and female teachers. ● Basic education taught by women teachers only.
Long term orientation ● Learning in tolerance and respect; ● Learning to save;
● They do not find it difficult in basic education if the mother ● Difficulty in basic education if the mother works;
works; ● Greater development of synthetic thinking.
● Greater development of analytical thinking.
Indulgence/ ● Importance of sports; ● Little importance for sports;
Restraint ● Encouraging positive emotions; ● Little incentive for positive emotions;
● Freedom of speech considered important. ● Freedom of speech is not a primary concern.
Source: Elaborated by the authors based in Hofstede (2001); Minkov and Hofstede (2011). The table was made using literature review based on the cited authors.
The table does not fully reproduce the concepts of the mentioned authors.

Table 2. Cronbach’s alpha, KMO measure and communalities for the variables.
Variables Description Cronbach’s alpha KMO Communality
Power distance 1 low versus high power distance 0.639 0.762 0.519
Power distance 2 0.655 0.745 0.563
Uncertainty avoidance 1 low versus high uncertainty avoidance 0.639 0.782 0.621
Uncertainty avoidance 2 0.647 0.748 0.621
Individualism 1 collectivism versus individualism 0.665 0.662 0.707
Individualism 2 0.667 0.554 -
Masculinity 1 femininity versus masculinity 0.667 0.688 0.505
Masculinity 2 0.684 0.420 -
Long term orientation 1 short term orientation versus long term orientation 0.646 0.866 0.358
Long term orientation 2 0.685 0.442 -
Indulgence 1 indulgence versus restraint 0.647 0.653 0.786
Indulgence 2 0.630 0.729 0.728
Strategic management 1 formalization versus not formalization 0.639 0.803 0.599
Strategic management 2 planning problem versus execution problem 0.677 0.595 0.576
Strategic management 3 evaluation versus not evaluation 0.639 0.716 0.654
School management 1 political factors versus technical factors 0.669 0.657 0.646
School management 2 democracy and participation versus technique and efficiency 0.638 0.829 0.546
School management 3 high educational index (IDEB) versus low educational index (IDEB) 0.657 0.696 0.666
Source: Elaborated by the authors.

values; Factor b, with three values; Factor c, with two
values; Factor d, three values; Factor e, with two values
and Factor f, with two values, totaling 15 variables. The
highest positive value was indulgence 1 (0.879) and the
lowest positive was long-term orientation 1 (0.466), with
a negative factor also appearing for strategic manage­
ment 2 (−0.689).
Finally, the elements were nominated, which count­
ing on the abstraction and all the work carried out,
endeavors to attribute some meaning to the factors
(Hair et al., 2014). The appointing of names was per­
formed from the literature used that showed
a connection to the listed variables and the factors cre­
ated. The six named factors are shown in the following:
● Factor a) School plan: through the relationship
between strategic management variables 3 (assess­
ment), strategic management 1 (formalization) and
school management 2 (democracy/participation
and efficiency/technique). Therefore, the school
needs a consistent school plan, which can generate
all schooling aspects, and at a future moment can
be assessed to improve planning;
● Factor b) Participation: through the relationship
between the variables aversion to uncertainty
(absolute/relative truth), aversion to uncertainty
2 (subjective/objective) and long-term orientation
1 (analytic/synthetic thinking). As such, the
school has the need for the participation of all
contributors to achieve the objectives. This
involves higher collaboration of the management
team, teachers, staff, students and community, in
order that uncertainties are diminished and each
one can focus on the long-term factor of the
organization;
● Factor c) Citizen formation: through the relation­
ship of the variables indulgence 1 (sports) and
indulgence 2 (freedom of speech). Therefore, it
involves the development of activities beyond the
classroom, seeking, as such, to provide to the stu­
dent a holistic vision to the activities, in order they
reach the fullest characteristics of citizen formation.
This also implies freedom of thought;
● Factor d) Pedagogic practices: through the relation­
ship of the variables of power distance 1 (practical/
theory), power distance 2 (independence of stu­
dents) and school management 3 (perception of
IDEB). Thus, it includes pedagogical practices that
stimulate the real learning of the student, in a way
that goes beyond the mere transmission of knowl­
edge and focuses on the full understanding of the
subjects;
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 7
● Factor e) Innovative Practices: through the rela­
tionship between the variables of school manage­
ment 1 and strategic management 2 (planning/
execution). Highlighted here is that the variable
strategic management was the only to appear in
a negative fashion, indicating, as such, an inverse
impact on the factor. Therefore, the school should
know how to observe the internal, as well as the
external environment to use both strengths and
weaknesses, in order to have the capacity to inno­
vate in its administrative and pedagogical
practices.
● Factor f) Community: through the relationship of
the variables individualism 1 (collectivity/individu­
alism) and masculinity 2 (social adaptation/perfor­
mance). Through the aforementioned, the school
needs to know how to involve the community and
the students to balance aspects of the collective,
individual, social adaptation and performance.
This fact covers, for example, social projects and
actions, as well as the application of tests to mea­
sure attained knowledge
Discussion
From the six factors created and named, one can initially
reach the technical and political factors in improving
school management. Grouped together here are two tech­
nical factors (school plan and innovative practices;
Friedman & Berkovich, 2020; Slater, 2011) and four poli­
tical factors (participation, citizen formation, pedagogical
practices and community; Libâneo, 2013; Lück, 2009).
Figure 2 shows the factors obtained from the factorial
analysis and its divisions into technical and political.
The first point of analysis is in the relationship of the
importance between the technical and political factors.
The results pointed to on Table 2 and the association
with Figure 2, lead to the understanding that the tech­
nical factors (28.8% – representing 47.5% capacity of
explanation) and politics (31.84% – representing 52.5%
capacity of explanation) possess similar relevance in
strategic management and school cultural organization
(Friedman & Berkovich, 2020; De Oliveira et al., 2020).
Subsequently, emphasis is placed on the need for the
school organization to have adequate plans to reach the
objectives (Bellibas & Liu, 2017; Lück, 2009), which
involve specific plans for the administrative and peda­
gogical areas, as schools that deal with strategic manage­
ment lack administrative plans. In addition, on many
occasions, the PPP is merely an accessory piece, without
its full potential being used toward school improve­
ments (De Oliveira et al., 2020).
8 P. H. OLIVEIRA ET AL.
Figure 2. Elements of factor analysis.
Source: elaborated by the authors.
Once again, emphasis is placed on the need to balance
the instrumental factors along with the political factors for
good school management (Libâneo, 2013), dealing with the
objective of the school, as in the development of capacities,
values and preparation for technologies, along with the
model for participatory, structured and evaluative manage­
ment (Bellibas & Liu, 2017; Lück, 2009; Paro, 2008).
Through such, another factor pointed out was parti­
cipation, understood as the internal relationship among
education professionals, as well as the external relation­
ship with the community (Poubel & Junquilho, 2019).
Democratic management is one of the pillars of partici­
pation (Lück, 2009; Paro, 2008), also appearing as an
expressed value, which the school should deal with in
order to reach improvement (Versiani et al., 2016).
Participation should be considered in the elaboration
of school plans, in that they become holistic and attend
to the real needs of the organization, and in the strategic
planning of the school (Bell, 2002). As a suggestion, one
can use planning tools that contemplate participation,
such as public scorecard (PSS), in the public sector
(Moullin, 2017), and balanced scorecard (BSC), aimed
at the school (De Oliveira et al., 2020).
The following factor is citizen formation. Here, there
exists the need that one contemplates education beyond
the mere transmission of knowledge (Libâneo, 2013;
Lück, 2009). In addition, there is the need to place
nuances of a different nature into teaching, with free­
dom of speech, participation in sports, knowledge of
culture, while cultivating freedom of thought.
Therefore, the search is for change in education from
mere passing of knowledge to the education of liberating
character in the formation of the human being, in its
fullest sense (Paro, 2008). Following this, indulgence
appears as an important component for this analysis of
the school relationships, as it seeks to use human aspects
of life (Hofstede, 2001).
Pedagogical practices also are an important factor
within the school scenario, which encompasses the rela­
tionship with the students, conciliation between theory and
practice and the performance assessment (Hofstede, 2001;
Passador et al., 2017). Therefore, the school needs to
embrace new educational methods, values and an institu­
tional environment in these practices (Versiani et al., 2016).
Likewise, it is necessary that it be included in the PPP, as
more efficient schools are able to incorporate pedagogical
practices into its school plan, as in (Passador et al., 2017).
It is evident that public schools need a more efficient
and participatory management, which seeks innovations
and transformations through its activities (Bell, 2002).
Innovative practices are another element taken from the
factorial analysis. Innovation is closely related to orga­
nizational culture and can aid the organization in chan­
ging its values, improve communication and reach its
objectives (Ramachandran et al., 2011; Riivari et al.,
2012). In addition, innovation is able to mold the strat­
egy, so that the school manages to change its organiza­
tional structure and improve its performance over the
long term (Torugsa & Arundel, 2017).
The last factor highlighted was community, under­
stood as the relationship found among the internal par­
ticipants between the education professionals and
students as that found between the external participants,
as in parents and students, school neighbors and public
agencies. The factor of community is in agreement with
the democratic and participatory school management
(Poubel & Junquilho, 2019). In addition, the community
should be involved with school management and school
planning. An example of this involvement would be the
election of school management against substitution
through political indication, where the latter is some­
thing still practiced within many municipalities (Bell,
2002; Lück, 2009; Paro, 2008).
Noted here, therefore, is that the technical and poli­
tical factors obtained in the factor analysis (Table 3),
school plan, participation, citizen formation, pedagogi­
cal practices, innovative practices and community, could
have a strong relationship to each other and could influ­
ence school management. In this way, these factors also
could possess a relationship with strategic management
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 9

Table 3. Factor analysis.

Variables Factors

Name Description a b c d e f
Strategic management 3 Evaluation 0.754
Strategic management 1 Formalization 0.706
School management 2 Democracy/participation 0.599
Efficiency/technique
Uncertainty avoidance 2 Absolute/relative truth 0.776
Uncertainty avoidance 1 Subjectivity/Objectivity 0.751
Long term orientation 1 Analytical/Synthetic Thinking 0.466
Indulgence 1 Sports 0.879
Indulgence 2 Freedom of speech 0.779
Power distance 2 Practice/theory 0.705
Power distance 1 Independence students 0.637
School management 3 Educational index (IDEB) perception 0.604
School management 1 Technical and political factors 0.756
Strategic management 2 Planning/Execution −0.689
Individualism 1 Collectivity/individuality 0.763
Masculinity 1 Social adaptation/Performance 0.547
Cumulative percentage of explained variance - 21.95% 31.24% 39.70% 47.37% 54.22% 60.64%
Source: Elaborated by the authors.

(Bell, 2002) and the organizational culture of the school
(Gunbayi, 2011). In particular, one can interlink the six
factors put forward on Table 2 with the six cultural
dimensions of Geert (Hofstede, 2001; Hofstede et al.,
2010; Minkov & Hofstede, 2011). This is presented in
Figure 3.
Note here that the factors raised in the survey are
related to the cultural dimensions, with some factors
being related to more than one dimension. Highlighted
also is that these relationships were based in part on the
theoretical as they were in the practical sense, as seen in
the return of responses of the questionnaires.

Figure 3. Relationship between research factors and cultural dimensions.

Source: elaborated by the authors.
10 P. H. OLIVEIRA ET AL.
In this manner, the reality is that schools still could
lack organizational development that empowers peda­
gogical and administrative development. School plans
are reactive and are unable to involve the school as
a whole; participation is still an incipient awareness
and only focused on the formation of some mandatory
councils; citizen formation is not stimulated, with the
role of the school to transmit content and in molding
citizens; pedagogical practices and innovative practices
are scarce, with repetitive maintenance of work from
previous years; finally, the community, in a school envir­
onment, parents of students, public initiative and private
initiative, once again do not participate effectively in the
Figure 4. Relation of research factors with environment and term orientation (4A reality and 4B better performance).
Source: elaborated by the authors.
reality of Brazilian public school. For these reasons, the
observed school reality is compared, through the factors
raised, with possible solutions to be implemented.
Figures 4A and 4B demonstrate the space for perfor­
mance improvement of Brazilian public schools’ man­
agement. Some good practices could be developed, such
as pedagogical school plans and holistic administration,
integrated and participative; fostering school participa­
tion through the community, not only for the composi­
tion of councils, but rather for the effectiveness of
democratic teaching and service practices, and the col­
laboration between the different schools and public
organizations for creating values and sharing innovative

and pedagogical practices. In addition, there is the need
to redirect the factors that exist in the school, as it
becomes necessary to extend the factors to provide bet­
ter use of the external environment and time over the
long term.
Conclusions
The objective behind this article was reached through
the systematization of political and technical factors of
organizational culture and strategic management, while
aiming at higher school organizational management.
Once again, one notes here that the two administrative
concepts cited possess a strong relationship, although
with limited research in the context of the subject at
hand. Thus, the article herein innovates through its
theoretical and practical contributions in public
administration.
The main contribution of this study was the under­
standing some administrative concepts in public orga­
nizations, principally in municipal public schools of
Brazil. In light of the aforementioned, there is space for
improving organizational management through the use
of strategic management and organizational culture.
Accordingly, the concepts were deepened, through
their extending into diagnostic factors of the Brazilian
public school reality. Hence, an empirical advance is
made into the theory and practice of this type of orga­
nization, which is given little direct research.
There is, as such, space for improving performance in
Brazilian public schools. There exist a number of good
practices that should be brought to the fore, with the
possibility of specifying each of the factors raised, in
order to privilege not only the short term and the inter­
nal environment, but also the long term and the internal
environment. Schools on a national and international
level possess different demands and necessities.
Therefore, the issues concerning indexes and socioeco­
nomic level must be overcome to understand the factors
that make these similar and those that differentiate.
Through use of this factorial analysis based on
a survey of 407 responses from school principals, six
main elements were detected that could empower the
management of public school organizations: planning,
participation, citizen formation, innovative practices,
pedagogical and community practices. These factors
were grouped into technical and political questions.
A division of this sought aids in the understanding of
different visions on public organizations. Highlighted
here is that the underscored factors can be adapted to
other organizational realities, which constitute a starting
point for improving management.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 11
Finally, emphasis is placed on the limitation of the
study that was found in mounting the database for
Brazilian public schools. Difficulties in particular
were encountered in obtaining data from the
Brazilian government. Due to the aforementioned,
the authors herein created an independent database,
with information made available on the internet. The
suggestion of future work is in the sense of applying
the research to other institutional school levels and
other types of public organizations. Suggestion is also
made to the application of the research in other
countries, as a way of comparing the results through
cultural dimensions.
Theoretical and practical contributions
The theoretical contributions are directed toward fill­
ing the gap in the factor research that affect the
management of public organizations, especially pub­
lic schools. As such, administrative concepts were
researched with a large study sample; strategic man­
agement cycle and cultural dimensions (Hofstede,
2001; Thompson & Strickland III, 2003), besides add­
ing school management characteristics (Destler, 2016;
Gunbayi, 2011; Lück, 2009). Therefore, one notes an
advance in the mapping of elements that can enhance
organizational management.
The practical contributions are in the sense of
helping public leaders, whether school principals or
public managers, in the management of resources,
pointing out the six elements that the school man­
ager must take into account in their performance. In
this way, the identification of the factors helps in the
holistic understanding of the internal and external
environment of the organization. Therefore, the hol­
istic vision contributes toward continual improve­
ment, with the grouping together of technical and
political challenges that permeate public organiza­
tions. The technical and political factors identified
in the research study can be found in other types of
public organizations and public schools, thus also
widening its capacity for action.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
This work was supported by the Coordination for the
Improvement of Higher Education Personnel - Brazil
(CAPES) under Grant Finance code 001.
12 P. H. OLIVEIRA ET AL.
ORCID
Pedro Henrique de Oliveira http://orcid.org/0000-0002-
1616-6465
Fernando César Almada Santos http://orcid.org/0000-
0002-9317-088X
Marco Antonio Catussi Paschoalotto http://orcid.org/
0000-0003-2276-8531
Marcelo Seido Nagano http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0239-
1725
Elizabeth Mie Hashimoto http://orcid.org/0000-0003-
0949-2358
References
Acar, M., & Robertson, P. J. (2004). Accountability challenges
in networks and partnerships: Evidence from educational
partnerships in the United States. International Review of
Administrative Sciences, 70(2), 331–344. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0020852304044260
Al Suwaidi, M., Jabeen, F., Stachowicz-Stanusch, A., Webb, M.
(2020). Determinants linked to executive succession plan­
ning in public sector organizations. Vision, 24(3), 284–299.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0972262920932405
Andrews, K. R. (1971). The concept of corporate strategy (3rd
ed.). Dow Jones-Irwin.
Awasthy, R., Chandrasekaran, V., & Gupta, R. K. (2011). Top-
down change in a public sector bank: Lessons from employ­
ees’ lived-in experiences. Journal of Indian Business Research,
3(1), 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1108/17554191111112460
Bell, L. (2002). Strategic planning and school management:
Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing? Journal of
Educational Administration, 40(5), 407–424. https://doi.
org/10.1108/09578230210440276
Bellibas, M. S., & Liu, Y. (2017). Multilevel analysis of the
relationship between principals’ perceived practices of
instructional leadership and teachers’ self-efficacy percep­
tions. Journal of Educational Administration, 55(1), 49–69.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-12-2015-0116
Bryson, J. M. (1988). Strategic planning for public and non­
profit organizations: a guide to strenghering ans sustaining
organizational achievement. Jossey-Bass Inc.
Carlisle, Y. (2011). Complexity dynamics: Managerialism and
undesirable emergence in healthcare organizations. Journal
of Medical Marketing, 11(4), 284–293. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1745790411424972
Chandler, A. D. (1990). Strategy and structure: Chapters in the
history of the industrial enterprise. MIT press.
Chu, K. W. (2016). Leading knowledge management in
a secondary school. Journal of Knowledge Management, 20
(5), 1104–1147. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-10-2015-0390
Corfield, A., & Paton, R. (2016). Investigating knowledge
management: Can KM really change organisational
culture? Journal of Knowledge Management, 20(1), 88–103.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-12-2014-0502
de Oliveira, P. H., Paschoalotto, M. A. C., de Godoy
Delmônico, D. V., de Souza Coelho, F., Santos, F. C. A.,
Escrivão Filho, E. (2020). Strategic management in public
administration: A balanced scorecard applicability
framework in school management. Future Studies
Research Journal: Trends and Strategies, 12(3), 458–482.
https://doi.org/10.24023/futurejournal/2175-5825/2020.
v12i3.517
Destler, K. N. (2016). Creating a performance culture:
Incentives, climate, and organizational change. American
Review of Public Administration, 46(2), 201–225. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0275074014545381
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics
(3nd ed.). Artmed.
Friedman, D., & Berkovich, I. (2020). Influence tactics and
‘second-order’ change in schools: Case study research of
principals’ political behaviors and strategies. International
Journal of Educational Management, 35(1), 327–339.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-08-2020-0413
Gadman, L. J. (2013). Open source leadership: Leading and
managing community led programmes to support strategies
for next generation broadband implementations across
Europe. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 21
(4), 528–545. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-03-2012-0571
Grissom, J. A., & Loeb, S. (2011). Triangulating principal
effectiveness: How perspectives of parents, teachers, and
assistant principals identify the central importance of man­
agerial skills. American Educational Research Journal, 48(5),
1091–1123. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211402663
Gunbayi, I. (2011). Principals’ perceptions on school manage­
ment : A case study with metaphorical. Analysis International
Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(2), 541–561.
Hair, J. F., Jr, Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E.,
Tatham, R. L. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.).
Pearson New International Edition.
Ho, D., Lee, M., & Teng, Y. (2016). Size matters: The link
between staff size and perceived organizational support in
early childhood education. International Journal of
Educational Management, 30(6), 1104–1122.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing
values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across
nations (2nd ed.). Sage.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Culture and
organizations: Software of the mind: Intercultural cooperation
and its importance for survival (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Horng, E. L., Klasik, D., & Loeb, S. (2010). Principal’s time use
and school effectiveness. American Journal of Education,
116(4), 491–523. https://doi.org/10.1086/653625
IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics). (2010).
Brazilian demographic census. Retrieved January 10, 2021,
from https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/brasil/sp
Libâneo, J. C. (2013). Organização e gestão escolar: Teoria
e prática (6th ed.). Heccus.
Lück, H. (2009). Dimensões da gestão escolar e suas
competências. Editora Positivo.
Minkov, M., & Hofstede, G. (2011). The evolution of
Hofstede’s doctrine. Cross Cultural Management: An
International Journal, 18(1), 10–20. https://doi.org/10.
1108/13527601111104269
Mojibi, T., Hosseinzadeh, S., & Khojasteh, Y. (2015).
Organizational culture and its relationship with knowledge
management strategy: A case study. Knowledge
Management Research & Practice, 13(3), 281–288. https://
doi.org/10.1057/kmrp.2013.49

Molineux, J. (2013). Enabling organizational cultural change
using systemic strategic human resource management -
a longitudinal case study. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 24(8), 1588–1612. https://doi.org/
10.1080/09585192.2012.723022
Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value – Strategic man­
agement in government. Harvard University Press.
Moullin, M. (2017). Improving and evaluating performance
with the Public Sector Scorecard. International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, 66(4), 442–458.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-06-2015-0092
Muqadas, F., Rehman, M., Aslam, U. (2017). Exploring the
challenges, trends and issues for knowledge sharing:
A study on employees in public sector universities. VINE
Journal of Information and Knowledge Management
Systems, 47(1), 2–15. https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-06-
2016-0036
Naumov, A., & Puffer, S. (2001). Measuring Russian culture
using hofstede’s dimensions. Applied Psychology, 49(4),
709–718. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00041
Ng, E. S. W., Gossett, C. W., Chinyoka, S., Obasi, I. (2016).
Public vs private sector employment: An exploratory study
of career choice among graduate management students in
Botswana. Personnel Review, 45(6), 1367–1385. https://doi.
org/10.1108/PR-10-2014-0241
Paro, V. H. (2008). A estrutura didática e administrativa da escola
e a qualidade do ensino fundamental. Revista Brasileira de
Política e Administração da Educação, 24(1), 127–133.
Paschoalotto, M. A. C., Passador, J. L., Passador, C. S., Oliveira, P.
H. D. (2020). Local government performance: Evaluating effi­
ciency, efficacy, and effectiveness at the basic education level.
Brazilian Administration Review, 17(4), 1–17. https://doi.org/
10.1590/1807-7692bar2020190149
Passador, C. S., Passador, J. L., & Carneiro-da-cunha, J. A.
(2017). Students’ performance in the public education in
the state of São Paulo, Brazil. International Journal of
Management in Education, 11(2), 188–205. https://doi.org/
10.1504/IJMIE.2017.083356
Patnaik, B., Beriha, G. S., Mahapatra, S. S., Singh, N. (2013).
Organizational learning in educational settings (technical):
An Indian perspective. The Learning Organization, 20(2),
153–172. https://doi.org/10.1108/09696471311303782
Pavlidou, C. T., & Efstathiades, A. (2021). The effects of internal
marketing strategies on the organizational culture of second­
ary public schools. Evaluation and Program Planning, 84(1),
1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101894
Pheysey, D. C. (2002). Organizational cultures: Types and
transformations (pp. 360). Routledge.
PISA (Programe for International Student Assesment) (2020)
Resultados do PISA 2018. Retrieved April 17, 2020, from
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa_19963777
Poubel, L., & Junquilho, G. S. (2019). Beyond management:
The process of managing at a public school of elementary
education in Brazil. Cad. EBAPE.BR, 17(3), 539–551.
Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1990). The core competence of
the corporation. Harvard Business Review, 68(3), 79–91.
Qubaisi, A. A., Badri, M., Mohaidat, J., Al Dhaheri, H., Yang,
G., Al Rashedi, A., Greer, K. (2017). An analytic hierarchy
process for school quality and inspection: Model develop­
ment and application. International Journal of Educational
Management, 30(3), 437–459.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 13
Ramachandran, S. D., Chong, S. C., & Ismail, H. (2011).
Organisational culture: An exploratory study comparing
faculties’ perspectives within public and private universities
in Malaysia. International Journal of Educational
Management, 25(6), 615–634. https://doi.org/10.1108/
09513541111159086
Riivari, E., Lämsä, A. M., Kujala, J., Heiskanen, E. (2012). The
ethical culture of organisations and organisational
innovativeness. European Journal of Innovation
Management, 15(3), 310–331. https://doi.org/10.1108/
14601061211243657
Robertson, P. J., & Briggs, K. L. (1998). Improving schools
through school-based management: An examination of the
process of change. School Effectiveness and School
Improvement, 9(1), 28–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/
0924345980090102
Rottig, D. (2017). Meta-analyses of culture’s consequences for
acquisition performance: An examination of statistical arti­
facts, methodological moderators and the context of emer­
ging markets. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 12
(1), 8–37. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJoEM-01-2015-0003
Schmitz, L., & Weber, W. (2014). Are Hofstede’s dimensions
valid? A test for measurement invariance of uncertainty
avoidance. Interculture Journal: Online-Zeitschrift Für
Interkulturelle Studien, 13(22), 11–26.
Segal, L. (2012). Instilling stewardship to address the integrity/
efficiency dilemma. Administration & Society, 44(7),
825–852. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095399711427533
Silva, L. P. L. P., Fadul, É. (2011). Organizational culture and
discourses: A case of change in a Brazilian public
organization. BAR - Brazilian Administration Review, 8(2),
185–204. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1807-76922011000200005
Slack, N. J., & Singh, G. (2018). Diagnosis of organizational
culture in public sector undertakings undergoing reforms.
Public Organization Review, 18(3), 361–380. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11115-017-0383-5
Slater, C. L. (2011). Understanding principal leadership: An
international perspective and a narrative approach.
Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 39
(2), 219–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143210390061
Smollan, R. K. (2015). Causes of stress before, during and after
organizational change: A qualitative study. Journal of
Organizational Change Management, 28(2), 301–314.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-03-2014-0055
Suwannathat, P., Decharin, P., & Somboonsavatdee, A. (2015).
Fostering innovation in public organizations in Thailand.
International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 23(4),
528–544. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-03-2012-0563
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2012). Using multivariate
statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
Thompson, A., Jr, & Strickland III, A. J. (2003). Strategic
management: Concepts and cases (13th ed.). Mcgraw-Hill.
Torugsa, N. A., & Arundel, A. (2017). Rethinking the effect of
risk aversion on the benefits of service innovations in public
administration agencies. Research Policy, 46(5), 900–910.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.03.009
UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund). (2017). Annual
results report 2017 – Education. Unicef.
Versiani, Â. F., Rezende, S. F. L., Pereira, A. C. (2016).
Contribuições da Teoria Institucional para a Análise da
Gestão de Escolas: Um Estudo de Caso de Escola Pública
14 P. H. OLIVEIRA ET AL.

Brasileira bem Sucedida nos Índices de Desempenho da Wronka-Pośpiech, M., & Frączkiewicz-Wronka, A. (2016).
Educação Básica. REAd-Revista Eletrônica de Strategic orientation and organisational culture in polish public
Administração, 22(1), 193–224. https://doi.org/10.1590/ organisations: Insights from the miles and snow typology.
1413-2311.0312015.57041 Management, 20(1), 126–141. https://doi.org/10.1515/man
World Bank. (2018). Learning: To realize education’s promise. ment-2015-0029
World Development Report. Yoo, B., Donthu, N., & Lenartowicz, T. (2011). Measuring hof­
World Bank. (2021). Data topics, education statistics. Retrieved stede’s five dimensions of cultural values at the individual level:
April 14, 2021, from https://datatopics.worldbank.org/ Development and validation of CVSCALE. Journal of
education/ International Consumer Marketing, 23(3–4), 193–210.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 15

Appendix 1 Survey Questionnaire

Questionnaire

Part 1
Based on the classification scale below, choose only one number for each set of listed factors. The numbers do not hold specific values and only represent
a continuous scale between the higher and lower definition of each factor. Therefore, adopt the following definition for the numbers: 1: I fully agree with
statement A; 2: I partially agree with statement A; 3: I do not agree nor disagree with statements A and B; 4: I partially agree with statement B; 5: I fully
agree with statement B.
Part 2
City (will not be disclosed): School (will not be disclosed):
Age of school principal: Period that position of principal has been held:
Sex: masculine/feminine/prefer not to answer Education and training (courses):
Part 3
Column A Scale Column B
Independence of students in the presence of teachers 1 2 3 4 5 Dependence of students in the presence student teachers
Transfer of personal truths by the school (practice) 1 2 3 4 5 Transfer of personal knowledge by the school (theory)
Open situations focused on discussions (subjective responses) 1 2 3 4 5 Structured and rigid situations focused on the right answers (objective
answers)
Truth may be relative 1 2 3 4 5 Truth is absolute
Collective treatment of students (collectivity) 1 2 3 4 5 Individual treatment to the student (individuality)
Goal of education is to understand how to do 1 2 3 4 5 Goal of education is to understand how to learn
The goal is the social adaptation of the student 1 2 3 4 5 The goal is student performance
Higher number of male teachers 1 2 3 4 5 Higher number of female teachers
Focus on analytical thinking 1 2 3 4 5 Focus on synthetic thinking
Focus on short-term actions 1 2 3 4 5 Focus on long-term actions
Sport is of primary concern 1 2 3 4 5 Sport is not a primary concern
Freedom of speech is a primary concern 1 2 3 4 5 Freedom of speech is not a primary concern
Part 4
Column A Scale Column B
The objectives of the school and future actions are formalized 1 2 3 4 5
The objectives of the school and future actions are not formalized
Greater difficulty exists with the planning of school activities 1 2 3 4 5
Greater difficulty exists with executing school activities
Goals and objectives are measured and evaluated 1 2 3 4 5
Goals and objectives are not measured nor evaluated
Technical and political factors influence the goals and values of 1 2 3 4 5
Technical and political factors do not influence the goals and values of
the school the school
School management is focused on democracy and participation 1 2 3 4 5 School management is focused on technical aspects and efficiency
School performance on the IDEB is high 1 2 3 4 5 School performance on the IDEB is low
Source: Elaborated by the authors.