Luận án Quản trị nguồn nhân lực các trường đại học địa phương thuộc khu vực miền Trung Việt nam: Thực trạng và giải pháp

SHEET In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of philosophy in Educational Management, this research entitled “Management of Human Resources at the local Universities of central region of Vietnam: reality and solutions” has been submitted by Chau Van Lương - Money, and is hereby recommended for oral examination. DR. LEONISA O.BERNARDO Research Adviser Approved by the Oral Examination Committee, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Educational Management offered by Southern Luzon State University, Republic of the Philippines in collaboration with Thai Nguyen University, Socialist Republic of Vietnam. DR. .... DR Member Member DR. DR. Member Member DR. SUSANA A. SALVACION, Ph.D. Chairman Dean, Graduate School Accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Educational Management offered by Southern Luzon State University, Republic of the Philippines in collaboration with Thai Nguyen University, Socialist Republic of Vietnam. WALBERTO A. MACARAAN, Ed .D Vice President, Academic Affairs Date___________________ iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my sincere thanks to Republic of the Philippines Southern Luzon State Universityb Lucban, Quezon and teachers, Tutors for the invaluable support during the course of the study and particularly for guidance in preparation of this thesis: Dr. Cecilia N. Gascon, President of the Southern Luzon State University, Republic of the Philippines; Dr. Dang Kim Vui, President of Thai Nguyen University; Prof. Nordelina (Nordy) B. Ilano, Director, Office of International and Alumni Affairs (OIAA) Southern Luzon State University (SLSU) Lucban, Quezon, Philippines; I special thanks also Dr. Leonisa O. Bernardo for her supervision, enthusiastic support, invaluable guidance, suggestions and comments during preparation and completion of this research; Dr. Tran Thanh Van, head of postgraduate, Thai Nguyen University and Prof. Dr Hùng, director of International training center. I express gratitude would be given to the International Relations Center of Agriculture and Forestry University, which created the opportunity for me to undertake the PhD’s course on Educational Management and expand my knowledge in various aspects of educational management. My thanks also express to leaders, oficcers, teachers and administrational staffs of local Universities which include Hong Duc University, Ha Tinh University, Quang Binh University, Quang Nam University, Phu Yen University and Pham Van Dong University which co-operate and support me during the study time and universities’ Reality survey time. Last but not least, the special thanks are given to my lovely family with my deceased day, my mom my wife and my children, who strongly support and encourage author to complete the course. Thank you, Chau Van Luong – (Money) iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TITLE PAGE ................................................................................................................ i APPROVAL SHEET ................................................................................................. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ........................................................................................ iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................... vi LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................. vii LIST OF APPENDICES ........................................................................................ viii ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. x Chapter I: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................... 1 Background of the study ............................................................................................ 2 Objectives of the study: ............................................................................................... 4 Research hypothesis .................................................................................................... 5 Significance of the study ............................................................................................. 5 Scope and limitations of the study: ............................................................................ 5 Definitions of terms: .................................................................................................... 6 Chapter II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND STUDIES ....................................... 9 Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................... 9 Research Paradigm .................................................................................................... 34 Chapter III: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 35 Localities of the study: .............................................................................................35 Research Design ........................................................................................................ 35 Population and Sampling ........................................................................................... 35 Research Instrumentation .......................................................................................... 36 Data gathering procedures ......................................................................................... 36 Statistical Treatment .................................................................................................. 38 Chapter IV: RESULTS AND DISSCUSSION ......................................................... 42 Chapter V: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary: .................................................... ..............................................................52 Findings: ................................................................................................................... 52 Conclusions .............................................................................................................. 53 Recommendations: ................................................................................................... 53 BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................................... 56 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................... 59 CURRICULUM VITAE .......................................................................................... 128 v LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Team managers, lecturer and staff year 2008-2012 .................................... 28 2. Admissions year 2013 ................................................................................. 29 3. List the Local Universities of central region of Viet Nam ......................... 35 4. Frequency, Percentage and Distribution of the Respondents ...................... 36 5. General statistics on the objects of survey participants: Gender, Position, Qualifications, Working time ................................................................................... 40 6. Mean Deviation of variants Reality ............................................................ 43 7. Mean Deviation of variants necessity ......................................................... 44 8. Mean Deviation of variants Feasible feasible ........................................... 44 9. Correlations ................................................................................................ 45 10. The Reality of human resources management: Perception ....................... 48 11. The Reality of human resources management: Function of Recruitment and selection ..................................................................................................................... 48 12. The Reality of human resources management: Functional of training and development. ............................................................................................................. 49 13. The Reality of human resources management: Function of retention ...... 50 14. The need of the perfect solution HRM ...................................................... 51 15. The feasibility of the solutions to improve HRM ...................................... 52 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figures ....................................................................................................................... Page 1. The HRM Framework ............................................................................................ 14 2. Function of HRM ................................................................................................. 17 3. Diagram organizational structure ......................................................................... 27 4. Diagram representing independent variables and dependent variables and results of the study .......................................................................................................................... 34 5. Location of Local universities in the Central Region of Vietnam ....................... 41 vii LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix Page 1. Appendix "A", The Tables ........................................................................................ 59 2. Appendix "B", Question survey questions reality, the necessity and feasibility of a complete solution HRM ............................................................................................... 114 3. Appendix "C", Established Decision 6 Local University ......................................... 118 4. Appendix "D", Mechanisms, policies of HRM of the local university .................... 119 5. Appendix "E", Confirmation of the universities surveyed .. .................................... 120 viii Title: MANAGEMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCE AT THE LOCAL UNIVERSITIES OF CENTRAL REGION OF VIET NAM: REALITY AND SOLUTIONS Researcher: CHAU VAN LUONG – (MONEY) Degree: Doctor of Philosophy in Educational Management Name/Address of the Southern Luzon State University Institution: Graduate School Lucban, Quezon Date Completed: April 2014 Adviser: Dr. LEONISA O. BERNARDO ix ABSTRACT The main purpose of this study is to analyze the management of human resources of local universities in central Vietnam through three main functions: functions Recruitment and Selection, functions Training and Developing, and functions retention. Thereby offering solutions to improve the management of human resources of the local university in Central Vietnam. This study used the descriptive design of the correlation analysis of the variables investigated, measuring the administrative functions of human resources limit the use of the questionnaire and the results of operations of the local universities in recent years. Questionnaires were used to collect data through surveys at six local universities, the three subjects: of management staff, faculty and administrative staff of the school. Nearly 450 peoples answered in this study. Data was analyzed by SPSS software. Thereby, there is no significant distinction of three subjects answered the questionnaire, the unanimously proposed solutions are given. The solution proposed management is necessary and feasible to improve the management of human resources local university in Central Vietnam in the coming years. 1 Chapter I INTRODUCTION There are 14 coastal provinces in the central region of Vietnam, running from Thanh Hoa to Binh Thuan Province1. The total area of this region is 90.790 km2, accounting for 28% of the total natural area of the country. The central region is bordered in the North by the Red River Delta and the Northern mountainous areas, in the South by the Southern region, in the East by the East Sea, and in the West by the Central Highland. The Central region of Vietnam is surrounded by ranges of mountains, running from the West to the coastal line in the East. This region has very extreme weather conditions. However, it is very rich in natural resources. With a coast line of around 1,000 km, it has great potential for marine economic development. This central region has many beautiful landscapes which are well-known in the country. Social conditions: This region has a population of 18,994,709 people, accounting for 21.7% of the population of the country. Economic conditions: Economic growth of this central region is still slow. Education and training: People in this region are known to be studious. There are many cultural celebrities and heroes in the protection, and development of the country. Tertiary education: There are two regional universities, including Hue University and Danang University. In addition, there are several other universities under the management of the ministries. There have also been 8 local universities formed under the management of the provincial authorities since 1997 in the central region. This accounts for 8/22 universities in the country2. In the 21st century, education and training in general and tertiary education in particular is facing many challenges of the intellectual economy, globalization, expansion of information technology, and harsh competition of high quality human resources,..... Tertiary 1 There are 14 coastal provinces in the central region of Vietnam: Thanh Hoa, Nghe an, Ha Tinh, Quang Binh, Quang Tri, Thua -Thien- Hue, Da Nang , Quang Nam, Quang Ngai, Binh Dinh, Phu Yen, Khanh Hoa, Ninh Thuan và Binh Thuan. 2 See Table A1, Appendix "A" 2 education in Vietnam nowadays plays an important role. The Resolution N0: 14/2005/NQ-CP confirms that3: "Reform of higher education is the cause of the people under the leadership of the Party and the State's management. The State increases investment in higher education, and to promote socialization, creating favorable conditions in policies for organizations, individuals and the whole society to participate in the development of higher education”4. During the past few years, higher education in Vitnam has been developing in terms of both quantity and training scale. Since 1997, the education system in Vietnam has established local universities to meet the demands of human resources for the localities alongside national universities, regional universities and universities under the management of ministries. In the process of formation and development, besides the advantages, local universities are facing many challenges, especially in human resource management. To basically and comprehensively renovate the Vietnam education in the period 2011-2020, it is necessary and urgent to conduct a study and to propose appropriate and effective solutions HRM of local universities since it will make a decision upon the existence and development of these universities at the current time. Thus, I choose the topic this study “Management of Human Resources at the local Universities of central region of Vietnam: reality and solutions”. Background of the study After 25 years of renovation and 10 years implementation of the 2001-2010 Education Development Strategy, tertiary education of Vietnam has developed significantly in terms of the scales, the varieties of universities, and the training forms. Social resources have been mobilized more and more and have had great achievements, providing labor forces for the socio-economic development, industrialization, modernization, and international integration. 3 [19]: Resolution On substantial and comprehensive renewal of Vietnam’s tertiary education in the 2006-2020 period of The Government No: 14/2005/NQ-CP 4 [19]: Resolution N0: 14/2005/NQ-CP, On substantial and comprehensive renewal of Vietnam’s tertiary education in the 2006-2020 period 3 Formation of local universities is based on the demands for socio-economic development, especially the needs for training human resources for the localities and the region. During the past few years, local universities in particular and higher education in Vietnam in general have got many favourable conditions and have gained many achievements as evaluated in the 2011-2020 Education Development Strategy. In addition to the advantages mentioned, there are still many disadvantages and weakness in the education of Vietnam: the national education system is not consistant; quality of education is still very low as compared to the demands for development of the country in this new period and the education level of the countries which have well-developed education system in the region and in the world; The relation between growth in number and enhanced quality has not been clarified; The professional skills of the graduates do not meet the requirements of workplaces; there are signs of misled behaviour and lifestyle of parts of students; there are still inadequate points in education management. Education management is still subsidised, duplicated and fragmented; professional responsibility and authority donot go together with the financial and human resource management responsibility and authority. Legal system and education policies are not consistent. They are not amended and modified in the timely manner. Policies for mobilisation and allocation of resources for education are not relevant; resources are not used efficiently. Investment of the Government in education does not concentrate on priority objectives; expenditure on professional activities is still low. There are not sufficient and practical regulations on the self-reliance and social responsibilities of education institutions; parts of teachers and education managers do not the requirements and duties of education in the new period. Teaching staff is redundant, yet insufficient and inconsistent in professional structure at the same time. Rate of teachers with post-graduate degrees is still very low; the percentage of students per lecturer does not meet the set target in the 2001-2010 Education Development Strategy. There is still a small part of teachers and 4 education managers who show their lack of responsibility and dedication to their profession. They violate the moral values and lifestyles of teachers, which has negative impacts upon the reputation of teachers in the society. Capacity of parts of teachers and education managers is low. Policies for teachers and education managers, especially those related to salaries and allowances are not adequate and do not encourage talented people to work in education. In addition, the policies have not given a driving force for teachers and managers to strive in their professional activities. Training and retraining of teachers do not meet the requirements of education ronovation. Thus, during the past ten years, education of our country has gained many achievements, contributing significantly to improved intellectual standards of people, human resources development, talent fostering, and security ensuring. This facilitates the country in the world integration process. Education in Vietnam in general and especially of local universities need to take careful, thorough and serious consideration in order to have adequate and effective solutions Management in general and HRM. Objectives of the study: This study acmod to fuid out the management of human resources at the local uni at central Vietnam with an end view of solutions HRM, complete recommendations for this following school year. The study focused on the following objectives: - Activity human resource management focuses on the following 3 functions: + Function of Recruitment and Selection + Functional of training and development + Function of retention (maintain) - Recommendations complete Solutions to HRM from the above variables: + Cognitive Solutions HRM + Completes Group solution HRM: ++ Function of Recruitment and Selection 5 ++ Functional of training and development ++ Function of retention (maintain) To achieve this goal, we rely on the evaluation of the 3 subjects in the university: management, Lecturer and administrative staff. Research hypothesis There was no significant difference the perceptions (assessment) of the 3 groups of respondent as to the management of human resource functions. Significance of the study This study is aimed at proposing Solutions for human resource management at the local universities of central region of Vietnam. Benefits of these solutions will be as follows: This study is aimed at proposing Solutions for human resource management at local universities in Vietnam. Benefits of these solutions will be as follows: As for the university managers: improve capacity of management, direction, and organization in accordance with the regulations and in a scientific and effective way. As for Lecturer: Provide favorable conditions so as to promote teaching capacity and to improve the quality of teaching and scientific research. Contribute to improving the quantity as well as the quality of Lecturer. As for administrative staff: Carry out their work in accordance with the regulations and enhance the quality of their performance, contributing to improving quality of teaching, learning, and conducting researches of teachers and students. As for schools and society: Improve quality of education and provide prestige and a brand name for the university. Society trust and have confidence in the university. As for local policy makers: Refer these policies to develop and finalise Solutions HRM of their schools in an appropriate and effective manner. Scope and limitations of the study: 6 This study will propose Solutions on effective human resource management at local universities in central Vietnam. As a baseline study, we will select 6 local universities in the central region, including: Hong Duc, Ha Tinh, Quang Binh, Quang Nam, Pham Van Dong, and Phu Yen universities. The number of participants in the survey will be about 450 people. There will be 75 participants from each university, including 25 manager, 30 Lecturer, 20 administrative staff. Research on human resource management local universities range, this thesis would have access to the basic content related to improvement of human resources management, namely Recruitment and Selection, training-development and retention of human resources. The author wishes to contribute to the development of local universities in Central Vietnam. Timing: The thesis mainly focuses on the status of local universities in central Vietnam in the year 2013. Definitions of terms: Human Resources: Human resources include all knowledge, skills, experiences, capacity, and creativeness of human which are related to the development of each individual and of the country. Human Resources in Education: This indicates human resources in education. In universities, human resources include managers, teachers and administrative staff. Policy: is a set of policy guidelines, the incentives depends on the object in order to achieve the policy goals of the policy holder. Education policy and training: are the policy and measures of the Party and the state to foster and develop the qualities and capabilities to every citizen the ideological, moral, scientific, health and career. Management/Governance: management is the targeted impacts of the managing objects on the managed objects in order to achieve the best results with predetermined targets. 7 Human Resources Management: The design and implementation of policies and activities to make the field for people to contribute the most effective value for the organization; namely Recruitment and Selection, training and development, and retention; including areas such as human resource planning, analysis and design work, recruiting and selection, performance evaluation, training and development, compensation, health and safety personnel, and labor relation, .... Local Universities: are public universities which provide multi-level and multi-sectoral trainings; these universities are under the management of the provincial people’s committees and under the state and professional management of the Ministry of Education and Training. A manager is a person who is responsible for allocating manpower and other resources and directing the operation of one part or the whole of an institution so that the institution operates effectively and achieves its objectives. According to “management level”, managers include top level and intermediate managers. Intermediate managers: Intermediate managers are people who receive large scale and comprehensive policies and strategies from top (senior) managers and turn them into specific and separate objectives and plans for their staff to implement. Top/senior managers: Top managers are people who are responsible for giving instructions and directions for operation of the whole organization. Top managers need to prepare and identify objectives, policies and strategies for their institutions. The objectives set by top managers in the hierarchical order in the institution need to be transferred to each member. Top managers usually represent the organization in community activities such as trading and negotiation. They spend time to discuss with other senior managers in the organization or with other related people in other organizations. 8 In public universities5, top managers are chairpersons of the university board, rectors and vice-rectors; Intermediate managers are heads and deputy-heads of the departments.; other people do not keep management positions such as lecturers, administration staff. 5 [13]: See Decision issuing "university charter" of prime minister no. 58/2010/QD-TTg 9 Chapter II REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND STUDIES This Chapter presents the theoretical background on human resources management (HRM) in general and at local universities in particular and other related issues. In addition, some diagrams and definitions of related concepts will be given to help readers have a better understanding of the concerned issues. Management /Governance: According to Gallagher (2002:2), “governance is the framework of relationships which bring about the aggregation, policy entrustment, planning and decision making, taking responsibility to the university, community, and learners for the confidence, compatibility and effectiveness of management fee; planning of policies and making decision on big investments.” On the other hand, - According to Mary Parker Follett: Management is the art of achieving goals through others. - Koontz and O 'Donnel: Management through its tasks means that "designing and maintaining an environment in which individuals work together in groups in order to complete the defined mission and goals.” - James Stoner and Stephen Robbin: Management is the process of planning, organizing, leading and controlling the activities of the members of the organization and using all the resources of the organization in order to achieve the goals proposed. Thus, we can understand that management is the targeted impacts of the managing objects on the managed objects in order to achieve the best results with predetermined targets. - Hoe (2012) defines manager as a person who is responsible for the fulfilling of the goals and objectives of the organisation while taking the role of managing the employees in 10 the organisation. Manager is also supported by the followers who will report and help the managers with relevant task (Huselid, 1995). - Dessler (2009) states that manager confronts the managing function through 4 perspectives namely planning, organizing, leading, and controlling. It is also determined as the managing process that is often conducted and carried by the managers of the organisation. Currently for public universities in Vietnam, the concept of governance (governance) can be understood as management (management). Manpower/Human resources: Depending upon the context, the concept manpower is sometimes used in place of human resources or workforce of an institution. Manpower means specific persons who undertake a position or a place in an office or institution. The concept human resource is often used to describe people (members) who are working in an institution. Manpower resources/Human resources (HR): According to the United Nations: “Human resources include all knowledge, skills, experiences, capacity, and creativeness of human which are related to the development of each individual and of the country.” According to the World Bank: ” HR are all human possessions, including physical strength, intellectual power, professional skills, etc of each individual”. Staffing/HR: refers to the process of recruiting and evaluating performance of the employees and overall subordinate performance that are based on the performance standards set by the agreement between managers and employees / subordinates (D...tific staff, technical instructors practice / experiment, organic personnel (payroll and list some insurance for public schools) have 2146 staffs, including whole-time lecturers is 1562 (72,79%); level: The number of organic lecturers have doctoral degrees 114 (7,3%), The number of organic lecturers have master's degrees 848 (54,29%), University: 684 (42,1%). - Regarding seniority: number of lecturers who has PhD qualified majority is over 50 years old. Management experiency in higher education is limited, most of them are inh erited from college level. 29 - Organisational structures: Forms of organisation and assignment of powers: comply with university regulations issued by Goverment; - Policies: implement general policies of state as well as local policies, especially on recruitment, training, fostering and attracting talent policies. In terms of Process: HR recruitment & selection: design and analysis work, HR plan, recruitment, arangement. HR training and development: did implement but annual rate has not met the school’s development demand: Number of teachers are trained doctoral degree less and slowly (Hong Duc uni has 45 doctors from 2007 to 2010, other uni has 1-2 doctor in each year doctors (8-10 years after established), althought uni has seperate mechanism it has not met demand Comparison of 2010, all universities have 25% of faculty doctoral qualifications, the local university in Central Vietnam was only 5.16%; for a master's degree, the local universities reached 47.95%, the country is 40%. According to the national vision 2020 reached 75% doctoral degrees, 90% master's degree.(see Table 1 and Table A18 in Appendices "A"). Table 2: Admissions year 2013 Training of Training of Training of Colleges TT Local universities Master University No N No N No N 1 Hong Duc 3 60 25 1850 13 940 2 Ha Tinh 10 880 6 530 3 Quang Binh 14 800 20 1050 4 Quang Nam 10 700 13 800 5 Pham Van Dong 5 450 16 800 6 Phu Yen 10 400 18 600 Total 3 60 74 5.080 86 4.720 30 - Retaining HR: evaluation, reward, insurance, benifits, workplace culture, labor relations,..: Scale training and trades training: Regarding training, the training school multilevel, multisectoral. Particularly Hong Duc University has been training since 2007 Master (see Table 2). Review on the HRM situation of local universities in the central region of Vietnam: The local university in central New largely formed on the basis of upgrading from teachers colleges, community colleges, so are the local priorities for investment funds, manpower. But besides the advantages and opportunities, the challenges are many schools, the following difficulties: - Development of Socio- Economic difficulties, most schools only rely on funding from the local level, where local is very limited, asynchronous; - A new unit should establish the management mechanism is still insufficient, inappropriate management in a combination of state of the Ministry of Education and Training and PPC; - The management of staff and management of the teaching faculty are not satisfied with the requirements to ensure quality education, faculty members have a doctoral degree is largely lacking (with the number of the Dr. just under 5 % of the total faculty - see Table 1); - Facilities, equipment, experiment, practice did not meet the training, poor and backward, especially the group specialized in engineering and technology. - Source limited annual enrollment (see Table 2). - The Managers: Old, lack of professional; - The Lecturers: Few ammount and not meet the training scale (30-40 student/Lecturer); Quality: experience level do not meet requirements (less than 10% and 40% nationally); low-level language skill (not sufficient to be used in teaching, scientific 31 research), knowledge of the information technology do not applied for the job; ... (See Table A1 in Appendices “A”) - Too much teaching hours (up 2-3 times the standard, even up to 7-8 times the standard in some cases ), only few scientific researches being conducted and can not be fully applied. - The working environment is not very good. - Satisfaction of lecturer with the HRM system is low Administrative staff: not professional, low wages - The management and administration of the univeristy: + Univeristy council hasnt been set up + The current process is outdated and not asynchronous ; + Lacking of application of modern information technology + Management of the univerity is not professional + Not really active and irresponsible in reporting + Finance is not practical to meet for practical training + Lack of Funding, therefore it doesn’t meet the practical need for training + Strategic staff resource training are not specific, not continuous and systematic, doesn’t meet the needs of integration and the development of education ; training fee is limited and can not meet the needs for staff developmetn of the university. + Policy to attract the new recruits doesnt meet requirement. The university can only recruited fresh graduate, but not lecturers with doctoral qualifications (only 1-2 people in more than 5 years). This is partly due to impratical head hunter. (See Appendíc “C”). + The school has motivated employees, but not balance, in some case it is not practical - The role of trade unions is not active , limited in participation in HRM . + Weak in conducting Scientific research and international cooperation + School dont conduct assessment and improve HRM on a regular basis 32 + Every Local University of HRM but these resource was still unprofessional and effectiveness. The major factors affecting the development of the local university in the coming years: Factors outside school First, the management of the Ministry of Education and Training through direct implementation of development strategies and network planning universities and colleges, the proposed policies specific training and the implementation of local and schools , enabling schools to participate in projects and programs by the Ministry in charge, especially in training schemes, training of human resources and so on ... Second, the interest of the party leaders and the local government and the relevant authorities of the province in terms of personnel, finance, land. Etc..., as well as promoting the role of the school in the local activities. Party Committee localities determined to build local university -oriented multi-disciplinary training, multi-level, career - oriented application and see this as an important factor for the province to help train human resources with technical expertise uniform structure, occupational adaptation, good service requests assigned to labor, labor restructuring and economic structure of the province, to ensure that provincial of sustainable development. Third, the income of the people in the central region , the improvement of their living standards increase learning needs and abilities in the training facilities, the development of production and the demand for trained workers of enterprises and other production facilities in the region . Fourthly, the strong growth of the company, business, the economy has created the conditions for the receipt of student internships, job creation, public employ, sponsor scholarships ... On the other hand, The economic, company, business development will also be helping in the local school curriculum suggestions, he invited lecture supply, where these research applications, disk transfer only the present study of the local university. 33 Factors inside school Firstly, the quality, the capacity of leaders and school officials, in particular the ability to have a vision and strategic planning, consensus on common goals and implement the will to strive non-stop to complete the task. Second, the material life and spiritual staff in improving attention, make them whole heart, whole mind to stick with school. Third, the university itself in the local structure activities with appropriate apparatus, the university will continue to expand and develop multidisciplinary training scale, multi- level, career-oriented - applications to meet the increasing demand for human resources for the province . The school has many activities to improve the teaching quality, promote scientific research and technology transfer , access to the research programs of local importance; continue to innovate methods of teaching and learning and enhance, and facilities, pages equipment, strengthening organizational management. Fourth, the political organization of the school as the Party and the constantly growing mass of organized force and scale of operation. These organizations have been trying to promote activities, to local universities in orbital development. 34 Research Paradigm Independent Variables Dependent Variables Analysis of HRM: Solutions HRM + Function of Recruitment and selection - Solution group cognitive of + Functional of training and HRM development - Solution group of HRM: + Function of retention + Function of Recruitment and selection + Functional of training and development + Function of retention MANAGEMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCE AT THE LOCAL UNIVERSITIES OF CENTRAL REGION OF VIET NAM: REALITY AND SOLUTIONS Figures 4: Diagram representing independent variables and dependent variables and results of the study 35 Chapter III METHODOLOGY In this chapter covers the research methodologies and research methods applied in the study. This also includes the research locale, the research design, respondents of the study, data gathering procedure and the statistical treatment. Localities of the study: Analysis of Human Resources Management at Local universities in the Central Region of Vietnam based on the study of the Reality in the period 2008-2013. On the succeeding pages, the location map of the aforementioned schools are presented and marked as figures 1 to 6 (see Table 3). Table 3: List the Local Universities of central region of Viet Nam No Name Universites In Local Note 1 Hong Duc Thanh Hoa First 2 Ha Tinh Ha Tinh 3 Quang Binh Quang Binh 4 Quang Nam Quang Nam 5 Pham Van Dong Quang Ngai 6 Phu Yen Phu Yen Research Design This research was a descriptive research analysis on various training conducted in various at local universities in Central Vietnam. The design described the essential character of the method. Employing this method dealt with collecting data to gather information about present existing conditions without analyzing relationship among variables. Population and Sampling - Secondary Documents: through self-assessment report of the local university (strengths, weaknesses and discussion) 36 - Form Survey: Satisfaction Survey stakeholders on HRM of local The stakeholders: Inside School, Team officials (managers, teachers, service personnel). - Data of surveyed: 6 Local universities will be surveyed: Hong Duc, Ha Tinh, Quang Binh, Quang Nam, Pham Van Dong and Phu Yen. The number of participants in the survey will be 450 people (See Table 4). There will be 75 participants from each university, including 25 manager, 30 Lecturer, 20 administrative staff. Research Instrumentation The statistical analysis was done using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), now also known as Predictive Analysis Software. Table 4: Frequency, Percentage and Distribution of the Respondents Amount University Location Total Respondents % Hong Duc Thanh Hoa 75 65 86.67 Ha Tinh Ha Tinh 75 64 85.33 Quang Binh Quang Binh 75 62 82.67 Quang Nam Quang Nam 75 69 92.00 Pham Van Dong Quang Ngai 75 68 90.67 Phu Yen Phu Yen 75 60 80.00 TOTAL 450 388 86.22 Data gathering procedures This study was conducted with the data collected from the survey with related persons (450 persons). It is worth to indicate that the respondents were drawn from a database of customers local university in Central Vietnam. The sample size was approximately 450 (6cases, 75 cases each survey questionnaire). Then, the survey was designed with the following steps: Step 1: Prepare a draft questionnaire for the survey sample . 37 Step 2: Send a cover letter and questionnaire form for the school. Sample sizes are generated randomly from the population and it is done according to the principles of thumb offered by Robson ( 2002). Step 3: Conduct a survey of 450 academic staff and administrative staff members in 4 weeks Step 4: Collect and process data . Step 5: Enter data into SPSS (388 questionnaire, received 62 votes or invalid) and prepare data analysis, including (1) descriptive statistics, (2) analyzing the test reliability, and ( 3 ) linear regression. Step 6 : Create the main findings and lists them in handling statistical research . Treatment following statistics were used to make the analysis and interpretation of data collected more valid . The respondents were randomly selected using the fish bowl technique. Of 388 respondents (teachers requested to answer the questionnaire, only 388 respondents returned the questionnaires thus reducing the total number of respondents to 86.22 percent). There were no restrictions as to who were qualified to answer the questionnaire such as sex, age, length of service,.... There was no difficulty encountered in selecting the respondents. The researcher adapted a questionnaire which was the main tool in gathering data. The questionnaire was divided into parts namely: Part I that dealt with the activities of HRM, and Part II with the perfect solution to HRM. Table 4 shows the distribution of teacher respondents from each school. Originally 86.22 percent of the total numbers of teachers in all the schools were requested to answer the questionnaire so as to get a similar proportion for all the school but some of those requested did not return the questionnaire. 38 86.67 percent of the HR of the Hong Duc Universiti answered questions, 85.33 percent of the HR of the Ha Tinh Universiti answered questions, 82.67 percent of the HR of the Quang Binh Universiti answered questions, 92.00 percent of the HR of the Quang Nam Universiti answered questions, 90.67 percent of the HR of the Pham Van Dong Universiti answered questions and 80.00 percent of the HR of the Phu Yen Universiti answered questions. All in all 388 respondents. The actual data gathering procedures was done through several processes. After the finalization of the instrument, the researcher asked the permission of the respective school heads and principals to administer the questionnaire. Those survey trips were done during the months of the third quater of 2013. The questionnaires were retrieved in early September 2013 thus tallying, tabulating and analyzing the data followed. There are 388 suitable questionaires among 450 delivered questionaires (there are 62 questionaires not recieved are unsuitable, See Table 5). This is shown in the Table 4 - Table 9 in Appendix “A” Statistical Treatment To answer the problems posed in this study, the following statistical tools were applied on the data collected. a. Apply the Cronbach's Alpha coefficient method to examine the close relationship of the questions (the variables) in the same content of the scale correlated with each other. b. Weighted mean was utilized to describe the perception of teacher-respondents on the influence of instructional variables and leadership styles of principals. The formula is: The formula is: WM = Where: WM = weighted mean ∑fw = sum of the product of the frequency and weight, n = total number. 39 c. Chi-square test, for determining the significant relationship of the instructional variables and leadership styles of principals. The formula is: X2 = ∑ Where: X2 = chi-square value, 0 = observed frequencies E = Expected frequencies 3.28 – 4.00 Strongly Agree (SA) 2.52 – 3.27 Agree (A) 1.76 – 2.51 Disagree (D) 1.00 – 1.75 Strongly Disagree (SD) And Solutions Variables: n = (3-1)/3 = 0.67 Necessity 2.36 – 3.00 Strongly Necessity (SN) 1.68 – 2.35 Necessity (N) 1.00 – 1.67 Not Necessity (NN) Feasible 2.36 – 3.00 Strongly Feasible (SF) 1.68 – 2.35 Feasible (F) 1.00 – 1.67 Not Feasible (NF) The statistical analysis was done using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), now also known as Predictive Analysis Software. n= (4-1)/4 = 0,75 40 Table 5: General statistics on the objects of survey participants: Gender, Position, Qualifications, Working time TT Percent Percent Frequency Cumulative Valid Percent 1 Gender Valid Male 208 53.6 53.6 53.6 Female 180 46.4 46.4 100.0 Total 388 100.0 100.0 2 Position Valid Top Manage 12 3.1 3.1 3.1 Manage 127 32.7 32.7 35.8 Lecturer 156 40.2 40.2 76.0 Administrative staff 93 24.0 24.0 100.0 Total 388 100.0 100.0 3 Qualifications Valid Professor/ A. 57 14.7 14.7 14.7 Professor/Dr Master 263 67.8 67.8 82.5 Bachelor 68 17.5 17.5 100.0 Total 388 100.0 100.0 4 Working time Valid Under 10 years 124 32.0 32.0 32.0 Under 25 years 100 25.8 25.8 57.7 Over 25 years 164 42.3 42.3 100.0 Total 388 100.0 100.0 41 THANH HOA 19018'- 20040' north, 104022'-106005' east HA TINH 17054'- 18050' north, 103048'-108000' east QUANG BINH 0 0 18 05'- 17 05' north, QUANG NAM 0 0 106 59'-105 36' east 15033'- 15055' north, 102002'-108003' east QUANG NGAI 14032'- 15025' north, 108006'-109004' east PHU YEN 0 0 12 42'- 13 41' north, 108040'-109030' east Figures 5. Location of Local universities in the Central Region of Vietnam 42 Chapter IV RESULTS AND DISSCUSSION This chapter presents the data on tables with their corresponding analysis and interpretation. The presentation followed the sequence of the specific problem: Evaluation of the credibility and relevance of the scale; Mean Deviation of Variables; Correlation of Variables; Correlations between Necessity, Feasibility, and Reality; Examining the Differences in Assessment of the Reality, Necessity, and Feasibility Factors; and results survey of local universities. Evaluation of the credibility and relevance of the scale In development of the scale, it is important to ensure that the scale is consistent and measurable. In this study, to ensure the reliability and validity of the scale, we apply the Cronbach's Alpha coefficient method to examine the close relationship of the questions (the variables) in the same content of the scale correlated with each other. This method can help to remove inappropriate variables and limit junk variables during the research. In addition, the Cronbach's Alpha coefficient can help to assess the reliability of the scale. Variables with the Corrected Item-Total Correlations < 0.3 will be removed. See Table A10 and Table A11 in Appendix “A”. 20 Reality variable, Alpha = 0.9418 12 Necessity variable, Alpha = 0.9959 12 Feasibility variable, Alpha = 0.9990 The table above shows that the scales are satisfactory since the Cronbach alpha coefficients are >0.90 and the Corrected Item-Total Correlations of all variables are> 0.3. Mean Deviation of Variables - Variable Reality, see table 6, - Variable Necessity, see table 7, - Variable Feasible, see table 8, 43 Table 6: Mean Deviation of variants Reality N0 Reality N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation 1 Reality01 388 1 4 3.46 0.628 2 Reality02 388 1 4 3.42 0.775 3 Reality03 388 1 4 1.93 0.918 4 Reality04 388 1 4 1.82 0.837 5 Reality05 388 1 4 1.89 0.902 6 Reality06 388 1 4 3.41 0.778 7 Reality07 388 1 4 1.72 0.729 8 Reality08 388 1 4 3.38 0.783 9 Reality09 388 1 4 3.14 1.026 10 Reality10 388 1 4 3.45 0.761 11 Reality11 388 1 4 3.39 0.801 12 Reality12 388 1 4 3.34 0.847 13 Reality13 388 1 4 3.32 0.861 14 Reality14 388 1 4 3.41 0.788 15 Reality15 388 1 4 1.95 0.916 16 Reality16 388 1 4 3.35 0.870 17 Reality17 388 1 4 3.33 0.850 18 Reality18 388 1 4 1.71 0.766 19 Reality19 388 1 4 3.36 0.850 20 Reality20 388 1 4 3.33 0.888 Valid N 388 (listwise) 44 Table 7: Mean Deviation of variants Necessity N0 Necessity N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation 1 Necessity01 388 1 3 2.85 0.415 2 Necessity02 388 1 3 2.86 0.406 3 Necessity03 388 1 3 2.84 0.436 4 Necessity04 388 1 3 2.85 0.409 5 Necessity05 388 1 3 2.85 0.411 6 Necessity06 388 1 3 2.85 0.402 7 Necessity07 388 1 3 2.84 0.424 8 Necessity08 388 1 3 2.85 0.421 9 Necessity09 388 1 3 2.85 0.405 10 Necessity10 388 1 3 2.85 0.415 11 Necessity11 388 1 3 2.85 0.409 12 Necessity12 388 1 3 2.84 0.434 Valid N 388 (listwise) Table 8: Mean Deviation of variants Feasible N0 Feasible N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation 1 Feasible 01 388 1 3 2.81 0.529 2 Feasible 02 388 1 3 2.80 0.537 3 Feasible 03 388 1 3 2.81 0.526 4 Feasible 04 388 1 3 2.80 0.536 5 Feasible 05 388 1 3 2.81 0.529 6 Feasible 06 388 1 3 2.81 0.528 7 Feasible 07 388 1 3 2.81 0.528 8 Feasible 08 388 1 3 2.80 0.536 9 Feasible 09 388 1 3 2.81 0.529 10 Feasible 10 388 1 3 2.80 0.536 11 Feasible 11 388 1 3 2.80 0.542 12 Feasible 12 388 1 3 2.81 0.529 Valid N 388 (listwise) 45 Correlation of Variables See Table A15 and Table A16 in Appendix “A”. Results of the analysis show that there is a close relationship between the variables. Correlations between Necessity, Feasibility, and Reality - Necessity and feasibility have a positive relationship with correlation coefficient of 0.346 and significant level 99%. - Reality and necessity also have relationship, with correlation coefficient of 0.305. - Feasibility and reality have relationship, with the highest correlation coefficient of 0.740. The feasibility factor will be able to address the shortcomings of the reality factor if it is implemented. Table 9: Correlations Reality Necessity Feasibility Pearson 1 .305(**) .740(**) Correlation Reality Sig. (2-tailed) . .000 .000 N 388 388 388 Pearson .305(**) 1 .346(**) Correlation Necessity Sig. (2-tailed) .000 . .000 N 388 388 388 Pearson .740(**) .346(**) 1 Correlation Feasibility Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 . N 388 388 388 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). 46 Examining the Differences in Assessment of the Reality, Necessity, and Feasibility Factors - To examine the differences in evaluation of the variables for the subjects (Rector/Vice Rector; As Heads / Deputies units of university; Lecturer; Administrative Staff), we apply the Anova variance analysis. - The issue is there is a difference between the 4 groups (Rector/Vice Rector; As Heads / Deputies units of university; Lecturer; Administrative Staff ) in assessment of the reality. * Reality variable Results of the analysis are shown in Table 20 in Appendix “A” It can be seen from Table 20 that there is a difference among groups in Reality assessment with significance level sig=0.000<0.01. With the reliability of 99%, it can be concluded that the difference in assessment of Reality of the four groups has statistic significance. Reality is descended in the ‘Lecturer’ and ‘Administrative Staff’ groups (this is shown in Table 21 in Appendix “A”). There are distinctive differences between ‘Rector/Vice Rector’ and ‘Lecturer’, between ‘Rector/Vice Rector’ and ‘Staff’, between ‘As Heads / Deputies units of university’ and ‘Teachers’, between ‘As Heads / Deputies units of university’ and ‘Administrative Staff’; there is no difference between ‘Rector/Vice Rector’ and ‘As Heads / Deputies units of university’ in assessment of the HR management Reality. This is shown in the Table 21 in Appendix “A”: * Necessity variable Results from the table above show that there are differences between groups in Necessity assessment with the significance level sig=0.000<0.01. With the reliability of 99%, it can be concluded that the difference in assessment of Necessity of the four groups has 47 statistic significance. Necessity is descended in the ‘Lecturer’ and ‘Administrative Staff’ groups (this is shown in the Table 22 in Appendix “A”). * Feasibility variable Results of the analysis are shown in the Table 23 in Appendix “A”: Results from the table 23 above show that there are differences between groups in Feasibility assessment with the significance level sig=0.000<0.01. With the reliability of 99%, it can be concluded that the difference in assessment of “Feasibility” of the four groups has statistic significance. “Feasibility” is descended in the ‘Teacher/Lecturer’ and ‘Administrative Staff’ groups (this is shown in the Table 23 in Appendix “A”). In consideration of the 12 questions in the Feasibility, There are distinctive differences between ‘Rector/Vice Rector’ and ‘Administrative Staff’, between ‘As Heads / Deputies units of university’ and ‘Administrative Staff’, between ‘Teachers/Lecturer’ and ‘Administrative Staff’; There are no differences between ‘Rector/Vice Rector’ and ‘As Heads / Deputies units of university’, between ‘Rector/Vice Rector’ and ‘Teachers/ Lecturer’, and between ‘As Heads / Deputies units of university’ and ‘Teachers/ Lecturer’ in assessment of Feasibility in HR management. This is shown in the Table 24 in Appendix “A”. Results survey of local universities. * The Reality of human resources management See Table 10 to Table 13: Questions 7 (1.72) and Questions 18 (1.71): Strongly Disagree; Questions 3 (1.93), Questions 4 (1.82), Questions 5 (1.89) and Questions 15 (1.95): Disagree Questions 9 (3.14): Agree There are 13 questions that SA - Strongly Agree See Table A19 in Appendix “A”. From Average Weighted Mean (WM) = 2.91, Conclusion - Agree 48 49 Table 10: The Reality of human resources management: Perception Average Weighted Mean: 2.5, Disagree. No Perception of HRM 1 2 3 4 Mean QD 1 Creating a firm philosophy that “HR is 0 28 152 208 3.46 SA the most important factor” in schools. HRM in your school has an important 2 position in the vision and mission of 20 9 146 213 3.42 SA your school. The school had an HR organization in a 3 professional and flexible, able to 148 147 64 29 1.93 D respond promptly to changes As you are now at their school, many 4 162 149 62 15 1.82 D people know about HRM As you are now at their school, 5 responsible for the management of all 153 150 58 27 1.89 D HR staff Average Weighted Mean 2.5 D Table 11: The Reality of human resources management: Function of Recruitment and selection. Average Weighted Mean: 3.0, Agree Function of Recruitment and selection No 1 2 3 4 Mean QD of HRM As you are now at their school, Recruitment is conducted in 6 21 7 151 209 3.41 SA accordance with: The school development strategy Your university, attract talent now has 7 162 182 34 10 1.72 SD appropriate and effective? Your work description complies with 8 21 10 157 200 3.38 SA the assigned tasks. You are aware of your expectations in 9 50 31 123 184 3.14 A work. Staff so that they manage their self- 10 19 7 143 219 3.45 SA development and learning. Average Weighted Mean 3.0 A 50 Table 12: The Reality of human resources management: Functional of training and development. Average Weighted Mean: 3.1, Agree Functional of training and development No 1 2 3 4 Mean QD of HRM In your opinion, an HR staff management needs: human approach, 11 22 12 148 206 3.39 SA management approach, system approach, and active approach. You are aware of the opportunity for 12 learning/research in work at your 28 11 149 200 3.34 SA university. Developing supporting roles of 13 28 17 144 199 3.32 SA managers. Currently the training and retraining of 14 school officials is appropriate and 20 13 141 214 3.41 SA effective There has been a linkage between HRM 15 activities other strategies of the 145 146 69 28 1.95 D university. Average Weighted Mean 3.1 A 51 Table 13: The Reality of human resources management: Function of retention Average Weighted Mean: 3.0, Agree No Function of retention of HRM 1 2 3 4 Mean QD Encouraging team work and 16 coordination between departments in 29 15 134 210 3.35 SA the school. Equal promotion opportunities for all 17 kinds of staff with specific plans for 27 16 147 198 3.33 SA utilization of human resources. Are salaries and other kinds of treatment appropriate with the 18 172 168 35 13 1.71 SD contribution and devotion of each individual? The school always pays attention to and 19 support with the working environment, 26 17 135 210 3.36 SA working conditions, and cultures. The school pays special attention to the 20 32 14 137 205 3.33 SA spiritual and material life of employees. Average Weighted Mean 3.0 A * The need of the perfect solution HRM See Table 14, There are 12 questions that Strongly Necessty (SN) From Average Weighted Mean (WM) = 2.85, Conclusion: Strongly Necessty 52 Table 14: The need of the perfect solution HRM TT Solutions 3 2 1 Mean QD In...9 .058 2.45 2.69 1 3 10 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 units of university Lecturer 156 2.88 .415 .033 2.81 2.94 1 3 104 Administrative Staff 93 2.56 .561 .058 2.44 2.67 1 3 11 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 units of university Lecturer 156 2.88 .415 .033 2.81 2.94 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.59 .556 .058 2.48 2.71 1 3 12 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 units of university Lecturer 156 2.87 .421 .034 2.81 2.94 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.54 .600 .062 2.41 2.66 1 3 Table A25: Necessity, Multiple Comparisons Mean 99% Dependent Difference Confidence Variable (I) Position (J) Position (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Interval Upper Lower Bound Bound Bound RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity1 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .117 1.000 -.37 .37 university Lecturer .13 .116 1.000 -.24 .50 Administrative Staff .40(*) .119 .005 .02 .77 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .117 1.000 -.37 .37 of university Lecturer .13 .046 .036 -.02 .27 Administrative Staff .40(*) .053 .000 .23 .57 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.13 .116 1.000 -.50 .24 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.13 .046 .036 -.27 .02 university Administrative Staff .27(*) .051 .000 .11 .43 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity2 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .114 1.000 -.36 .36 university Lecturer .12 .113 1.000 -.24 .47 Administrative Staff .41(*) .115 .003 .04 .77 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .114 1.000 -.36 .36 of university Lecturer .12 .045 .064 -.03 .26 Administrative Staff .41(*) .051 .000 .25 .57 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.12 .113 1.000 -.47 .24 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.12 .045 .064 -.26 .03 university 105 Administrative Staff .29(*) .049 .000 .14 .45 Lecturer -.29(*) .049 .000 -.45 -.14 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity3 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .121 1.000 -.38 .38 university Lecturer .12 .120 1.000 -.26 .50 Administrative Staff .45(*) .123 .002 .06 .84 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .121 1.000 -.38 .38 of university Lecturer .12 .048 .069 -.03 .27 Administrative Staff .45(*) .055 .000 .28 .62 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.12 .120 1.000 -.50 .26 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.12 .048 .069 -.27 .03 university Administrative Staff .33(*) .053 .000 .16 .50 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity4 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .115 1.000 -.36 .36 university Lecturer .13 .114 1.000 -.23 .49 Administrative Staff .40(*) .117 .004 .03 .77 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .115 1.000 -.36 .36 of university Lecturer .13 .046 .031 -.02 .27 Administrative Staff .40(*) .052 .000 .23 .56 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.13 .114 1.000 -.49 .23 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.13 .046 .031 -.27 .02 university Administrative Staff .27(*) .050 .000 .11 .43 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity5 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .115 1.000 -.36 .36 university Lecturer .12 .114 1.000 -.24 .48 Administrative Staff .42(*) .116 .002 .05 .79 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .115 1.000 -.36 .36 of university Lecturer .12 .045 .045 -.02 .27 Administrative Staff .42(*) .052 .000 .26 .58 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.12 .114 1.000 -.48 .24 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.12 .045 .045 -.27 .02 university Administrative Staff .30(*) .050 .000 .14 .46 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity6 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .113 1.000 -.36 .36 university Lecturer .13 .112 1.000 -.23 .48 Administrative Staff .40(*) .115 .004 .03 .76 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .113 1.000 -.36 .36 of university Lecturer .13 .045 .026 -.01 .27 106 Administrative Staff .40(*) .051 .000 .24 .56 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.13 .112 1.000 -.48 .23 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.13 .045 .026 -.27 .01 university Administrative Staff .27(*) .049 .000 .11 .42 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity7 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .118 1.000 -.37 .37 university Lecturer .13 .117 1.000 -.24 .51 Administrative Staff .43(*) .120 .002 .05 .81 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .118 1.000 -.37 .37 of university Lecturer .13 .047 .026 -.01 .28 Administrative Staff .43(*) .053 .000 .26 .60 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.13 .117 1.000 -.51 .24 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.13 .047 .026 -.28 .01 university Administrative Staff .30(*) .051 .000 .13 .46 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity8 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .118 1.000 -.37 .37 university Lecturer .13 .117 1.000 -.24 .51 Administrative Staff .42(*) .120 .003 .04 .80 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .118 1.000 -.37 .37 of university Lecturer .13 .047 .025 -.01 .28 Administrative Staff .42(*) .053 .000 .25 .59 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.13 .117 1.000 -.51 .24 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.13 .047 .025 -.28 .01 university Administrative Staff .28(*) .051 .000 .12 .45 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity9 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .112 1.000 -.35 .35 university Lecturer .12 .111 1.000 -.24 .47 Administrative Staff .43(*) .114 .001 .07 .79 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .112 1.000 -.35 .35 of university Lecturer .12 .044 .057 -.02 .26 Administrative Staff .43(*) .051 .000 .27 .59 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.12 .111 1.000 -.47 .24 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.12 .044 .057 -.26 .02 university Administrative Staff .31(*) .049 .000 .16 .47 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity10 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .115 1.000 -.36 .36 university Lecturer .12 .114 1.000 -.24 .48 107 Administrative Staff .44(*) .117 .001 .07 .81 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .115 1.000 -.36 .36 of university Lecturer .12 .045 .046 -.02 .27 Administrative Staff .44(*) .052 .000 .28 .61 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.12 .114 1.000 -.48 .24 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.12 .045 .046 -.27 .02 university Administrative Staff .32(*) .050 .000 .16 .48 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity11 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .114 1.000 -.36 .36 university Lecturer .12 .114 1.000 -.24 .48 Administrative Staff .41(*) .116 .003 .04 .78 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .114 1.000 -.36 .36 of university Lecturer .12 .045 .045 -.02 .27 Administrative Staff .41(*) .052 .000 .24 .57 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.12 .114 1.000 -.48 .24 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.12 .045 .045 -.27 .02 university Administrative Staff .29(*) .050 .000 .13 .44 RECTOR/VICE As Heads / Necessity12 RECTOR Deputies units of .00 .120 1.000 -.38 .38 university Lecturer .13 .119 1.000 -.25 .50 Administrative Staff .46(*) .122 .001 .08 .85 As Heads / RECTOR/VICE Deputies units RECTOR .00 .120 1.000 -.38 .38 of university Lecturer .13 .047 .043 -.02 .28 Administrative Staff .46(*) .054 .000 .29 .63 Lecturer RECTOR/VICE -.13 .119 1.000 -.50 .25 RECTOR As Heads / Deputies units of -.13 .047 .043 -.28 .02 university Administrative Staff .33(*) .052 .000 .17 .50 * The mean difference is significant at the .01 level. 108 Table A26: Feasibility, ANOVA Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. Feasibility1 Between Groups 24.574 3 8.191 37.477 .000 Within Groups 83.929 384 .219 Total 108.503 387 Feasibility2 Between Groups 25.078 3 8.359 37.049 .000 Within Groups 86.641 384 .226 Total 111.719 387 Feasibility3 Between Groups 22.842 3 7.614 34.632 .000 Within Groups 84.423 384 .220 Total 107.265 387 Feasibility4 Between Groups 25.464 3 8.488 38.055 .000 Within Groups 85.649 384 .223 Total 111.113 387 Feasibility5 Between Groups 24.574 3 8.191 37.477 .000 Within Groups 83.929 384 .219 Total 108.503 387 Feasibility6 Between Groups 23.700 3 7.900 36.034 .000 Within Groups 84.187 384 .219 Total 107.887 387 Feasibility7 Between Groups 23.700 3 7.900 36.034 .000 Within Groups 84.187 384 .219 Total 107.887 387 Feasibility8 Between Groups 25.464 3 8.488 38.055 .000 Within Groups 85.649 384 .223 Total 111.113 387 Feasibility9 Between Groups 24.574 3 8.191 37.477 .000 Within Groups 83.929 384 .219 Total 108.503 387 Feasibility10 Between Groups 25.464 3 8.488 38.055 .000 Within Groups 85.649 384 .223 Total 111.113 387 Feasibility11 Between Groups 26.371 3 8.790 38.644 .000 Within Groups 87.348 384 .227 Total 113.719 387 Feasibility12 Between Groups 24.574 3 8.191 37.477 .000 Within Groups 83.929 384 .219 Total 108.503 387 109 Table A27: Feasibility, Descriptives 95% Confidence Interval for Std. Std. N Mean Mean Deviation Error Lower Upper Minimum Minimum Bound Bound Maximum Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 1 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.37 .805 .083 2.20 2.53 1 3 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 2.99 .089 .008 2.98 3.01 2 3 2 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.35 .816 .085 2.19 2.52 1 3 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 3 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.39 .808 .084 2.22 2.55 1 3 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 4 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.35 .816 .085 2.19 2.52 1 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 5 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.37 .805 .083 2.20 2.53 1 3 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 6 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.38 .806 .084 2.21 2.54 1 3 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 7 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 110 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.38 .806 .084 2.21 2.54 1 3 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 8 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.35 .816 .085 2.19 2.52 1 3 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 9 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.37 .805 .083 2.20 2.53 1 3 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 10 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.35 .816 .085 2.19 2.52 1 3 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 11 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.34 .827 .086 2.17 2.51 1 3 Rector/Vice Rector 12 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 As Heads / Deputies 127 3.00 .000 .000 3.00 3.00 3 3 12 units of university Lecturer 156 2.90 .396 .032 2.83 2.96 1 3 Administrative Staff 93 2.37 .805 .083 2.20 2.53 1 3 111 Table A28: Feasibility, Multiple Comparisons Mean 99% Dependent Std. (I) Position (J) Position Difference Sig. Confidence Variable Error (I-J) Interval per Up Lower Bound Bound Bound Feasibility1 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 units of university Lecturer .10 .140 1.000 -.34 .55 Administrative staff .63(*) .143 .000 .18 1.09 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 university Lecturer .10 .056 .403 -.07 .28 Administrative staff .63(*) .064 .000 .43 .84 Lecturer Rector/Vice Rector -.10 .140 1.000 -.55 .34 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .056 .403 -.28 .07 units of university Administrative staff .53(*) .061 .000 .34 .73 Feasibility2 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .01 .143 1.000 -.45 .46 units of university Lecturer .10 .142 1.000 -.35 .55 Administrative staff .65(*) .146 .000 .18 1.11 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of -.01 .143 1.000 -.46 .45 university Lecturer .09 .057 .577 -.09 .27 Administrative staff .64(*) .065 .000 .43 .84 Lecturer Rector/Vice Rector -.10 .142 1.000 -.55 .35 As Heads / Deputies -.09 .057 .577 -.27 .09 units of university Administrative staff .54(*) .062 .000 .35 .74 Feasibility3 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .142 1.000 -.45 .45 units of university Lecturer .10 .140 1.000 -.34 .55 Administrative staff .61(*) .144 .000 .16 1.07 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of .00 .142 1.000 -.45 .45 university Lecturer .10 .056 .408 -.07 .28 Administrative staff .61(*) .064 .000 .41 .82 Lecturer Rector/Vice Rector -.10 .140 1.000 -.55 .34 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .056 .408 -.28 .07 units of university Administrative staff .51(*) .061 .000 .32 .70 Feasibility4 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .143 1.000 -.45 .45 units of university Lecturer .10 .141 1.000 -.35 .55 Administrative staff .65(*) .145 .000 .19 1.10 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of .00 .143 1.000 -.45 .45 university Lecturer .10 .056 .420 -.08 .28 112 Administrative staff .65(*) .064 .000 .44 .85 Lecturer MANAGERS -.10 .141 1.000 -.55 .35 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .056 .420 -.28 .08 units of university Administrative staff .54(*) .062 .000 .35 .74 Feasibility5 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 units of university Lecturer .10 .140 1.000 -.34 .55 Administrative staff .63(*) .143 .000 .18 1.09 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 university Lecturer .10 .056 .403 -.07 .28 Administrative staff .63(*) .064 .000 .43 .84 Lecturer Rector/Vice Rector -.10 .140 1.000 -.55 .34 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .056 .403 -.28 .07 units of university Administrative staff .53(*) .061 .000 .34 .73 Feasibility6 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 units of university Lecturer .10 .140 1.000 -.34 .55 Administrative staff .62(*) .144 .000 .17 1.08 As Heads / MANAGERS Deputies units of .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 university Lecturer .10 .056 .406 -.07 .28 Administrative staff .62(*) .064 .000 .42 .83 Lecturer Rector/Vice Rector -.10 .140 1.000 -.55 .34 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .056 .406 -.28 .07 units of university Administrative staff .52(*) .061 .000 .33 .72 Feasibility7 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 units of university Lecturer .10 .140 1.000 -.34 .55 Administrative staff .62(*) .144 .000 .17 1.08 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 university Lecturer .10 .056 .406 -.07 .28 Administrative staff .62(*) .064 .000 .42 .83 Lecturer Rector/Vice Rector -.10 .140 1.000 -.55 .34 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .056 .406 -.28 .07 units of university Administrative staff .52(*) .061 .000 .33 .72 Feasibility8 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .143 1.000 -.45 .45 units of university Lecturer .10 .141 1.000 -.35 .55 Administrative staff .65(*) .145 .000 .19 1.10 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of .00 .143 1.000 -.45 .45 university Lecturer .10 .056 .420 -.08 .28 Administrative staff .65(*) .064 .000 .44 .85 Lecturer Rector/Vice Rector -.10 .141 1.000 -.55 .35 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .056 .420 -.28 .08 units of university Administrative staff .54(*) .062 .000 .35 .74 Feasibility9 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 113 units of university Lecturer .10 .140 1.000 -.34 .55 Administrative staff .63(*) .143 .000 .18 1.09 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 university Lecturer .10 .056 .403 -.07 .28 Administrative staff .63(*) .064 .000 .43 .84 Lecturer MANAGERS -.10 .140 1.000 -.55 .34 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .056 .403 -.28 .07 units of university Administrative staff .53(*) .061 .000 .34 .73 Feasibility10 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .143 1.000 -.45 .45 units of university Lecturer .10 .141 1.000 -.35 .55 Administrative staff .65(*) .145 .000 .19 1.10 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of .00 .143 1.000 -.45 .45 university Lecturer .10 .056 .420 -.08 .28 Administrative staff .65(*) .064 .000 .44 .85 Lecturer MANAGERS -.10 .141 1.000 -.55 .35 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .056 .420 -.28 .08 units of university Administrative staff .54(*) .062 .000 .35 .74 Feasibility11 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .144 1.000 -.46 .46 units of university Lecturer .10 .143 1.000 -.35 .55 Administrative staff .66(*) .146 .000 .19 1.12 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of .00 .144 1.000 -.46 .46 university Lecturer .10 .057 .437 -.08 .28 Administrative staff .66(*) .065 .000 .45 .86 Lecturer Rector/Vice Rector -.10 .143 1.000 -.55 .35 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .057 .437 -.28 .08 units of university Administrative staff .55(*) .062 .000 .36 .75 Feasibility12 Rector/Vice Rector As Heads / Deputies .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 units of university Lecturer .10 .140 1.000 -.34 .55 Administrative staff .63(*) .143 .000 .18 1.09 As Heads / Rector/Vice Rector Deputies units of .00 .141 1.000 -.45 .45 university Lecturer .10 .056 .403 -.07 .28 Administrative staff .63(*) .064 .000 .43 .84 Lecturer Rector/Vice Rector -.10 .140 1.000 -.55 .34 As Heads / Deputies -.10 .056 .403 -.28 .07 units of university Administrative .53(*) .061 .000 .34 .73 Administrative staff * The mean difference is significant at the .01 level. 114 Appendix "B", QUESTION QUESTION Use For the Managers, lecturers and other administrative staff in Local University of central region of VietNam Direction: This questionnaire consists of two sections. Part 1 includes the activities / policies of human resources management, part two focuses on the necessity and feasibility of the proposed control measures. Please tell us perspective and cross "X" in the appropriate box: ie Part I - Management measures for the management of human resources 1 - Strongly Disagree (SD) 2 - Disagree (D) 3 - Agree (A) 4 - Strongly Agree (SA) In my opinion he / she, the level of implementation of management measures for the operational management of the human resources? 4 3 2 1 No HRM (SA) (A) (D) (SD) 1 Creating a firm philosophy that “HR is the most important factor” in schools. HRM in your school has an important 2 position in the vision and mission of your school. The school should organize HRM activities in a more professional and flexible manner 3 which will be able to respond promptly to changes. In your opinion, who is responsible for 4 HRM the Managers at different levels in schools in your school In your opinion, who is responsible for 5 HRM the All staff of the university in schools in your school Recruitment is conducted in accordance 6 with: The school development strategy 7 Your university, attract talent now has 115 appropriate and effective? Your work description complies with the 8 assigned tasks. You are aware of your expectations in 9 work. Staff so that they manage their self- 10 development and learning. In your opinion, an HR staff management needs: human approach, management 11 approach, system approach, and active approach. You are aware of the opportunity for 12 learning/research in work at your university. 13 Developing supporting roles of managers. Currently the training and retraining of 14 school officials is appropriate and effective There has been a linkage between HRM 15 activities other strategies of the university. Encouraging team work and coordination 16 between departments in the school. Equal promotion opportunities for all kinds 17 of staff with specific plans for utilization of human resources. Are salaries and other kinds of treatment 18 appropriate with the contribution and devotion of each individual? The school always pays attention to and 19 support with the working environment, working conditions, and cultures. The school pays special attention to the 20 spiritual and material life of employees. Part II - The necessity and feasibility of the measures of active management of human resources management Necessity Feasible 1- Strongly Necessity (SN) 1- Strongly Feasible (SF) 2- Necessity (N) 2- Feasible (F) 3- Not Necessity (NN) 3- Not Feasible (NF) 116 In my opinion he/she, to the extent necessary and feasible solutions to improve the management of operational management of the human resources themselves? Necessity Feasible TT Solutions Management SN N NN SF F NF 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 Increasing awareness about HRM to all officials and employees 2 Completing the organizational structure in HRM. Completing the recruitment process to 3 ensure clarity, transparency, and high quality. Enhancing the analysis of the 4 recruitment position to ensure that work is assigned to the right person and in an effective manner. 5 Strengthening building for staff in charge of human resources management 6 Enhancing training and retraining of managers and lecturers. 7 Strengthening the professionalism of the HRM department Supporting lecturers in enhancing their knowledge, participating in high quality 8 programs, and improving their language competence in teaching and conducting scientific research. Strengthening decentralization, 9 promoting autonomy and accountability of teachers throughout the school staff Evaluating and awarding according to 10 contribution and performance of the staff. Maintaining and developing good 11 working relationship for development of the school culture. 12 Improving working conditions of staff at the university. 117 Phần III: Information personal He/she please indicate the following information: a- He/She is working at the university: Hong Duc (1); Ha Tinh (2); Quang Binh (3); Quang Nam (4); Pham Van Dong (5); Phu Yen (6). b- Gender : Male (1) / Female (0) c-Position: - As Chairman of the Council in University: - Rector / Vice Rector - As Head / Deputy School of units - The Head of the Department under the Faculty - As teachers/lecturer (not administrators) - The administrative staff (not administrators). d- Qualifications: Professor/Associate Professor/Dr: Master Bachelor Degree Other e- Working time: 25 Year. f- Foreign language/ computer (not by training identical to 1) - Language: Certifications A/B Degree Intermediate/graduate/postgraduate - Computer: Certifications A/B Degree Intermediate/graduate/postgraduate Thank you! 118 Appendix "C", Established Decision 6 Local University: Hong Duc University is a university directly under the local People's Committee of Thanh Hoa province, established by decision dated 24.09.1997 No. 797/TTg of the Prime Minister on the basis of the Teachers College, High Economy class - Engineering, Medical College of Thanh Hoa. University of Ha Tinh is a local university was the Prime Minister decided to establish on March 19, 2007, established on the basis of the Teachers Training College in Ha Tinh, Vinh University Division and High Schools health - Ha Tinh Quang Binh University is a university directly under the local People's Committee of Quang Binh province was established in 2006 in Decision No. 237/2006/QD-TTg, on the basis of upgrading the Teachers College of Quang Binh . Quang Nam University is a public university directly under the People's Committee of Quang Nam Province, established in Decision 722/QD-TTg dated 08/6/2007 of the Prime Minister, on the basis of upgrading Teachers College Square South. Pham Van Dong University is a university directly under the local People's Committee of Quang Ngai province . Pham Van Dong University was established in 2007 by decision of the Prime Minister 1168/QD-TTg signed September 7, 2007 on the basis of upgrading the Teachers College of Quang Ngai and Community College Quang Ngai . University of Phu Yen is the Prime Minister established under Decision No. 112/QD-TTg January 24, 2007 on the basis of two cases: Phu Yen Teachers College of Economics and Technique - Phu Yen . 119 Appendix "D", Mechanisms, policies of HRM of the local university (See Page local electronic information) 120 Appendix "E", Confirmation of the universities surveyed OPEN LETTER To:9 ........................................................................................................... My colleagues who are managers, lecturers and experts - the administrative staff of local universities My name is Chau Van Luong, currently working at the University Pham Van Dong, Quang Ngai Province. Currently I am researching on "Management of human resources at the local universities of Central Region of Vietnam: Reality and Solutions". In my research content includes actual survey, so I send my questionnaire to you with my respectfully suggest that you take your time to help me completing these questionaire, as follows: Questionnaire consists of two parts, Part 1 (includes 20 questions) about the Reality of the activities of human resource management, Part two (includes 12 questions) focused on the need and feasibility of proposed management’s solutions. I wish you all help me facilitate for completing my research. Please send your comments to me directly or my email address: chauvanluong1510@yahoo.com.vn Please send back me the questionnaire after completion (with accompanying questionnaire). Sincerely thank you! Wish you health and happiness! Questionaire sender Chau Van Luong Cellphone: 0914.012.777. 9 Local Universities in Central of Vietnam: Hong Duc University (Thanh Hoa Province), Ha Tinh University (Ha Tinh Province), Quang Binh University (Quang Binh Province), Quang Nam University (Quang Nam Province), Pham Van Dong University (Quang Ngai Province) and Phu Yen University (Phu Yen Province). 121 SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF VIETNAM Independence - Freedom - Happiness CERTIFICATE HONG DUC 10 UNIVERSITY’S RECTOR ENDORSEMENTS: In 2013, Hong Duc University has received a request from Mr. Chau Van Luong - Vice Rector of Pham Van Dong University about the actual survey of Hong Duc University which is a part of his research on "Management of Human Resource at local universities of central region of Vietnam: reality and solutions ". Specifically: - The number of questionaire: 75 copies; - Object: + Managers: 25 people; + Lecturers: 30 people; + Experts - administrative staff: 20 people. - Content: (with accompanying questionnaire). Mr. Chau Van Luong was completed the survey with the support of Hong Duc University . Hong Duc, November 12th, 2013 Hong Duc University’s Rector 10 Ha Tinh University (Ha Tinh Province), Quang Binh University (Quang Binh Province), Quang Nam University (Quang Nam Province), Pham Van Dong University (Quang Ngai Province) and Phu Yen University (Phu Yen Province). 122 Certificate of Hong Duc University: 123 Certificate of Ha Tinh University: 124 Certificate of Quang Binh University: 125 Certificate of Quang Nam University: 126 Certificate of Pham Van Dong University: 127 Certificate of Phu Yen University: 128 RESEARCHERS 'S PROFILE Name English: MONEY, Name Vietnam: Chau Van Luong 986 Quang Trung , Quang Ngai, Vietnam Tel . No . (055) 3820343 Mobi . No . 0914.012.777 A. Personal data Reality : No Age : 56 Date of Birth : October 15, 1958 Place of birth : HaNoi Address : 986 Quang Trung, Quang Ngai, Viet nam Phone/ Mobile : (055) 3820343/0914.012.777 Father : Chau Van Son (d) Mother : Nguyen Thi Thao B. Educational attainment Degree School Year Graduated Mater. Hue Pedagogical University 2003 Undergraduate Hue Pedagogical University 1982 Degree Secondary Tran Quoc Tuan Standard Academy 1977 Elementary Khuong Trung Elementary School 1968 C. Eligibilities - Teaching mathematics and computer - Educational Administration D. Work Experiences 1983-1999 : Teacher 1999-2006 : expert 2007-2010 : Director , Head of 2011 to present : Vice Chancellor University E. Positions Held Vice Chancellor University Pham Van Dong , Quang Ngai --------------------- The End -----------------