Organisational Culture in Public University: A Case Study in Kosovo

• In recent decades, there has been a significant increase in research that focuses on organisational culture as an important construct that can support or hinder the implementation of changes in higher education. In developing countries of Europe, limited studies are assessing organisational culture and its alignment with planned changes in higher education institutions. Hence, the objective of this research was to identify the dominant organisational culture types in higher education and understand how the planned changes are aligned with the dominant cultures. The research was conducted in a large public university in Kosovo. The Competing Values Framework was used to assess the organisational culture. The study adopted a quantitative research approach. The sample consisted of 102 academic staff from a population of approximately 960. The data were collected using a standardised instrument (The Organisational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI)) to identify the dominant organisational culture based on four organisational culture types: clan, hierarchy, adhocracy, and market. The data related to the planned changes of the university were collected through document analysis. The research identified hierarchy and market cultures as the dominant cultures. The results also show that the dominant organisational cultures militate against the main planned changes. The findings confirm the relevance of the Competing Values Framework in assessing the organisational culture in higher education institutions and provide direction to academic leaders about how they can align their planned changes with the organisational culture to achieve better outcomes.


Introduction
In recent decades, the redefinition of the relationship between the state and the market has had a significant impact on education, especially higher education, which is undergoing a process of deep institutional change (Apple, 2016;Cowden & Singh, 2013;Fredman & Doughney, 2012;Henkel, 2007;Vaira, 2004;Zgaga, 2012 ). Some of these changes include moving from 'elite' to 'mass' education by increasing the number of students, utilising diversity in both academic staff and students, developing new programmes, increasing accountability to regulatory bodies, internationalisation and competing with private higher education institutions (Baer et al., 2015;Becker & Trowler, 2001;Berács, 2014;Coates & Goedegebuure, 2012;Turk & Ledić, 2017). Several authors recognise that the specifics and structure of higher education institutions represent a unique challenge for leaders in the process of implementing changes (Kezar, 2009;Rowley & Sherman, 2003;Shugart, 2013;Stephens et al., 2015). Moreover, universities are considered conservative by nature and resistant to change, sometimes even being compared to churches (Anderson & Wenderoth, 2007;Louvel, 2013;Weiler, 2005).
Given the content of changes, which involves deep or transformational changes, the organisational structure, and history of universities, it is essential for academic leaders to understand the organisational culture in order to be able to identify relevant approaches when initiating, shaping and implementing changes in higher education (Kezar, 2014). Many authors have recognised that organisational culture is one of the basic constructs to improve the performance of higher education institutions. It acts as a conduit for academic leaders to implement their strategies and changes, as well as transforming universities into more adaptive and flexible organisations (Becker & Trowler, 2001;Brennan & Shah, 2000;Cameron & Quinn, 2011;Smart & John, 1996;Tierney, 1988;Trowler, 2008).
As a new concept in the management and leadership of institutions, organisational culture remains a complex notion, and there are differences regarding both its definition as well as the elements and dimensions of culture (Alvesson, 2002). Alvesson argues that the most common differences related to the definition are those between culture as a metaphor (organisation is culture), an approach founded in cultural anthropology, and culture as an attribute of the organisation (the organisation has culture), an approach that derives from a sociological foundation. Within each of these disciplines (anthropological and sociological foundation), two different approaches to culture have been developed: a functional approach, which assumes that culture emerges from collective behaviour, and a semiotic approach, which assumes that culture resides in individual interpretation and cognitions (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). In addition, there are three different perspectives of studying organisational culture: the integration, differentiation, and fragmentation perspectives (Martin, 1992), recently used by Smerek (2010) and Cameron and Quinn (2011). The integration perspective assumes that culture is what people share or what holds them together and that there is a consensus about what culture exists in a particular organisation. The differentiation perspective assumes that culture is manifested by differences between subunits, and there is no consensus about what common culture exists. The third perspective, the fragmentation perspective, assumes that culture is ambiguous and unknowable and that individuals shift cultures frequently within an organisation so that no one culture can be identified.
Several authors have studied culture through the integration perspective. Schein is one of the most influential authors who have promoted the integration perspective for analysing and intervening in the culture of organisations. According to Schein (2004), the culture of a group is defined as: […] a pattern of shared basic assumptions that was learned by a group as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration, that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think and feel in relation to those problems […] (p. 17) Schein (1985) considers assumptions, values, and artefacts to be the main elements of the organisational culture. He asserts that the norms become a visible manifestation of the joints assumptions but suggests that it should also be considered that behind the norms lie deeper assumptions that most members of a culture do not question. Further, he explains that 'most of the members of a culture are not even aware of their own culture until they encounter a different one' (Schein, 1999, p. 236).
Schein is considered one of the best-known theorists of cultural change, but his studies were focused on businesses and other institutions in general rather than in higher education specifically. One of the most influential authors of studying organisational culture in higher education is Tierney, who also provides a definition of the organisational culture that is grounded on the shared assumptions of individuals in an organisation. Tierney (1988) believes that 'an organization culture is reflected in what is done, how it is done and who is involved in doing it ' (p. 3). In this process, there is a strong link between leadership and organisational culture as leadership plays a key role in supporting an organisation to shape its culture and adapt it to its change strategies (Buller, 2014;Chaffee & Tierney, 1988;Kezar, 2009;Parish, 2011;Ramsden, 2002;Schein, 2004;Summak & Kalman, 2020).
Since culture is complex, it is still difficult for leaders to assess, understand, and use it as an integral part of their decision making. In an attempt to explain organisational culture, to show how each culture reacts differently to change and how change strategies should be aligned to culture, four or more cultural archetypes have been listed (Bergquist, 1992;Berquist & Pawlak, 2007). The Competing Values Framework (CVF), which represents a typological approach, is one of the models that was adapted to assess culture in the few research work about higher education (Beyketin et al., 2010;Ferreira & Hill, 2012;Omerzel et al., 2011;Smart et al., 1997). This model, initially developed by Quinn and Roherbaugh (1983) and later further amended by Cameron and Quinn, groups organisational culture into four types: clan, adhocracy, hierarchy, and market culture. The Competing Values Framework is based on the definition of culture represented by the functional, sociological tradition and considers culture as an attribute of an organisation that can be measured separately from other organisational phenomena. The framework has two core dimensions and two secondary dimensions. The core dimensions represent a continuum ranging from flexibility, discretion and dynamism, at one end, to stability, order and control, at the other. The other core dimension differentiates an orientation towards focusing on internal capability, interpretation, and unity of processes, on the one hand, from an orientation towards focusing on external opportunities and differentiation from the competition, on the other.
The two core dimensions form four quadrants, which have been named clan, adhocracy, market, and hierarchy. The two upper quadrants share an emphasis on flexibility and dynamism, while the lower quadrants focus on stability and control. Hierarchy cultures emerge because the environment is stable, and the activities in this quadrant create the most value when failure is not an option. The assumption is that respecting rules and regulations leads to stable, efficient, and highly consistent results. The aim of market culture is to create competitive advantage through better results, whereby the core values, competitiveness and results are achieved by emphasising external positioning and control. The assumptions are that the external environment is hostile, the organisation is there to increase its competitive position and clear purpose, and its strategy should lead to the results. The label clan culture refers to a family-type organisation consisting of shared values and goals, unity and a sense of 'we-ness' , the main characteristics of which are teamwork, an employee involvement programme, and the organisation's commitment to its employees.
The assumption is that an organisation can be best managed through teamwork and employee development: it empowers employees and facilitates their participation, commitment and loyalty. The major goal of adhocracy culture is to foster adaptability, flexibility and creativity, in order to respond to uncertainty, ambiguity and information overload, while there is no centralised power or authority. The assumptions of adhocracy culture are that innovative and pioneering initiative leads to success, and the main role of management is to foster entrepreneurship, creativity, and activity on the cutting edge.
The secondary dimensions of the Competing Value Framework include dynamics or approaches to change. It separates value-creation strategies on the basis of speed and scope of action by addressing two key questions: 'how quickly must we act to create value? and how much change must we initiate to create value?' (Cameron et al., 2006, p. 13). The first differentiates a focus on the change that is new, innovative, unique and transformational from a focus on small incremental change. It implies a difference between a focus on the new and a focus on the better. The second distinguishes between emphasising fast, short-term and immediate change and focusing on long-term, developmental, and sustained change.
Overall, the Competing Values Framework enables identifying the dominant organisational culture types in an organisation and understanding what kind of approaches to change these dominant types of culture facilitate.

Research problem
Kosovo emerged as a country after the war in 1999 and declared its independence in 2008. Since then, Kosovo has struggled with the process of implementing EU-related reforms aimed at European integration. In this journey, ensuring a qualitative higher education is one of the challenges. To improve its performance, Kosovo higher education has experienced significant changes in the previous two decades. New public universities as well private colleges and universities were introduced to the higher education system. Making inclusive education part of education policies has tripled the number of students in the largest public university. The number of study programmes has also increased, while the teacher-student ratio has deteriorated considerably, presumably influencing the decline of higher education quality. Various efforts have been made to change curricula, develop new programmes in line with labour market requirements, take advantage of new technology, and increase research and scientific work. However, only limited results have been achieved, the number of graduates remains low, and there is a need to improve the quality of higher education (European Commission Report for Kosovo, 2019). After all these efforts, a question arises as to why it is taking so long and why it is so difficult for higher education institutions to implement the intended changes.
The intrusion of politics in higher education institutions is mentioned as the main reason for these limited results (European Commission Report for Kosovo, 2019; Gashi, 2014, ORCA, 2017, 2019PISA, 2019;Pupovci, 2015). The presence of various factors that impact changes in higher education has been recognised by Tierney (1988), but he suggests that organisational culture shall also be considered. He argues that 'institutions certainly are influenced by powerful, external factors such as demographic, economic, and political conditions, yet they are also shaped by strong forces that emanate from within' (Tierney, 1988, p. 3). Moreover, most of the changes planned to be implemented in higher education in Kosovo are second-order changes, which means they are deep, transformational changes that alter the operating systems, underlying values, and culture of an organisation and system (Kezar, 2014). However, given that the organisational culture is implicit, several authors suggest that academic leaders tend to ignore it (Schein, 2006;Smart & John, 1996;Smerek, 2010). This leads to the problem of our research: whether the changes in higher education in Kosovo occur more on the structure and process level, leaving aside the organisational culture and the impact it can have on the implementation of the planned changes.
Therefore, the objective of this empirical research is to identify the dominant organisational culture types in higher education institutions and understand how the planned changes are aligned with the dominant cultures within a context of a developing country. A large public university, which is regarded as bearing the responsibility for setting the standard of education in Kosovo (hereafter referred to as the 'Studied Public University' (SPU)), is the subject of the present research. The main research questions that lead this research are: (1) what are the current and preferred dominant organisational cultures in the SPU? and (2) how are the planned changes aligned with the identified dominant organisational cultures?

Method
The study employed a quantitative research method using a survey questionnaire to collect the data to identify the dominant organisational cultures. In addition, document analysis enabled gathering data related to the changes that SPU incorporated in its strategic plan, vision, and mission.

Sample and participants
The SPU was selected as a sample as it is the oldest public university; it has the most students and, as such, is seen as bearing the responsibility for setting the standard of education in Kosovo. The SPU consists of 14 faculties, eight of which have been selected through a purposeful sampling based on the criteria that they represent a combination of law, arts, and social sciences faculties, as well as engineering, science and mathematics. The population of the SPU is 960 academic staff. Thus, the sample of 280 academic staff (or 29% of the total population) was randomly selected from eight SPU faculties: five faculties from law, arts and social sciences and three faculties from engineering, science and mathematics. The demographic variables of participants included faculty, age, gender, position, and working experience in university. A total of 102 participants (36.4%) completed the questionnaire. Frequencies of the attributive variables in SPSS were calculated to describe how many participants were in the level of category, the percentage, and if there were any missing data. According to the data of the sample, 61 (61.0%) of the participants belonged to the social science faculties, and 39 (39.0%) came from natural sciences. There was an almost equal gender presentation of the academics in the sample, with 53 (52.0%) being male and 49 (48.0%) female. The largest number of 37 academics belonged to the age range between 36 and 45 years (36.3%), followed by 24 academics aged between 25 and 35 (23.5%), and 21 aged between 45 and 55 (20.6%). Those over 55 had the lowest representation in the sample with 8 (7.8%) academics.
Professors, associate professors, and assistant professors were grouped into the category of professor. The category of assistants included both junior and senior assistants. An almost equal presentation of these two categories was represented in this study, with 51 (50.0%) of the academics being professors and 49 (48.0%) assistants. Regarding working experience, 38 (37.3%) academics had been active in the university from 0 and 10 years, 33 (32.4%) academics between 11 and 20 years and 21 (20.6%) more than 20 years. The largest amount of missing data is also noted under the question related to the variable of age (12 incomplete or 11.8%) and working experience (10 incomplete or 9.8%), followed by faculty (2 missing or 2.0%) and position (2 missing or 2.0%).

Instrument
Although many instruments are used to assess organisational culture, the standardised Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI) was selected because of its conceptual appropriateness. It was developed based on the Competing Values Framework and measures types of current and preferred organisational culture (clan, adhocracy, market, and hierarchy), organisational culture congruence and approaches to change. OCAI has already been applied in studies in higher education; it is simple and easy to be used in practice. Another advantage of the OCAI questionnaire is that it consists of 24 statements, none of which is right or wrong. This is very appropriate for the contexts of developing countries, where the assessment of organisational culture and leadership issues in higher education can very easily be perceived as intentional or influenced, and it can lead to an unwillingness of academic leaders or academics to cooperate. The content of the OCAI questionnaire contributes significantly to limiting the effects of this possible interpretation. Permission from the authors to use the OCAI was first obtained. Then, an online version of the questionnaire was developed using Google Forms, and the participants answered it using an attitude scale (the Likert scale). The first part of the questionnaire also contained five additional questions about general demographic data.
Piloting the instrument -As there were no records that the OCAI questionnaire had previously been used in an Albanian version, the instrument was translated, crosschecked with several respondents, and then piloted in May 2018. Regarding the descriptive statistics to pilot the instrument, out of 30 returned questionnaires, the minimum mean was 2.53 while the maximum was 3.50. The standard deviation range was from 0.83 to 1.17, indicating that the scores were close together. The results confirmed that the instrument is reliable (α = .932) and valid (variance explained by the first factor 41.9%).
Reliability and validity of the instrument -Following the piloting of the instrument in the Albanian language, the research was conducted during April and May 2019. Out of 280 questionnaires distributed to academics, 102 were returned. The overall reliability coefficient (Cronbach's α) was very good (.953). Cronbach's α was also calculated for each of the four scales separately: clan (.857), adhocracy (.849), market (.895) and hierarchy (.847). Regarding the validity, the results showed that the variance explained by the first factor was 51.8%, confirming the instrument is valid.

Research design
The quantitative data gathering through the OCAI instrument took place during April and May 2019. Prior to that, a written request was submitted to the Rectorate of the SPU to enable the distribution of the questionnaire through their office to academics in eight faculties. The Rectorate indicated that it would not be advisable to route the questionnaire through that office as academics could understand this as pressure from the Rectorate to complete it. Since academics are free to answer whatever questionnaire is addressed to them, it was suggested that the researchers should approach the academics directly or coordinate the process through each faculty. A request was addressed to eight faculties for questionnaires to be distributed through their offices: three agreed to do this, other faculties suggested that the researchers distribute the questionnaire independently, as the list of the regular professors of their faculty was available on the faculty web page. The digital version of the OCAI questionnaire was distributed in April 2019 to the first three faculties who agreed to distribute the questionnaire through their office. The questionnaire was then distributed to the academics of other faculties, based on random sampling on the list of the regular professors published on the web page and using a snowball sampling.
It should be noted that there was no significant difference in the number of responses received from the faculties who distributed the questionnaire through their office or faculties where the researchers distributed the questionnaire directly. There was no obligatory/mandatory question included, and the deadline to complete the questionnaire was two weeks. The quantitative gathered data have been analysed using SPSS software. The mean and standard deviation were used to calculate descriptive data, while for analysing the inferential data, parametric tests were used: T-test and one-way ANOVA.
Given that a research question was also focused on analysing the types of changes as they were included in the vision, mission, and strategic objectives of the SPU, the following documents were selected to gather the data: 'Strategy and Action Plan of the SPU 2017-2019' , 'Rectors' work program until September 2020' , 'Statute of the SPU' , 'Kosovo Education Strategic Plan, 2017-2021' and 'Law on Higher Education in Kosovo, 2011' . For the purpose of this research, the following changes that were part of the main strategic objectives were selected: new teaching methodologies, providing faculty development in pedagogy, encouraging the continuous capacity building of teaching staff, developing PhD programmes in compliance with the Bologna system, increasing and improving research output, taking advantage of new technology, and implementing degree/study programmes in English. These changes were analysed to understand how they were planned to be implemented, how they were reflected in the vision and mission, and how the organisational culture would support or hinder their implementation.

Results and discussion
The results and discussion part is structured to initially present the answers to the first research question related to the identified dominant organisational cultures, cultural congruence, and discrepancies between current and preferred organisational cultures. Then, it will analyse and discuss the findings related to the second research question on how the types of changes planned in SPU strategic objectives align with the dominant organisational cultures.

Hierarchy and market culture identified as dominant organisational cultures
Initially, descriptive statistics were run for the 24 statements individually for the assessment of the culture now. The minimum mean of the items was 2.50 and the maximum 3.38, while the standard deviation ranged from 0.92 to 1.19. To examine further the research results regarding the pattern dimensions of the culture, the 24 statements were grouped into four variables in SPSS by placing six designated statements in each variable representing clan, adhocracy, market and hierarchy culture. The means for the grouped variables were as follows: hierarchy (3.04), market (3.03), adhocracy (2.81) and clan (2.71) (see Table 1). These mean results for the four types of culture are not highly differentiated and reflect the OCAI questionnaire authors' findings that 'when the Likert scale is used, respondents tend to rate all quadrants high or all low' (Cameron & Quinn, 2011, p. 184). Strength of the culture is determined by the scores with which the respondents rated the given cultures: the higher the score, 'the stronger or more dominant that particular culture is rated to be' (Cameron & Quinn, 2011, p. 83). The findings (see Table 1) indicate that the dominant cultures at the SPU, as assessed by the OCAI questionnaire, are hierarchy culture (3.04) and market culture (3.03). The results indicate that the basic assumptions, styles and values of hierarchy and market cultures tend to predominate in the SPU. According to the Competing Values Framework, with hierarchy and market as dominant cultures, the university tends to be a very structured and formal place in which to work, with a strong orientation toward results, where the major concern is getting the job done. These values are adopted to maintain internal control and generate efficient, reliable, and predictable results, as well as to face the external environment and achieve results that justify the university's work to third parties and remain competitive with other universities. The principles that govern the SPU are formal, detailed, and based on rules and procedures, enabling productivity and objectives. Thus, the procedures govern what people do, and they (the people) also tend to be competitive and goal oriented. The leaders consider themselves to be good organisers and coordinators or efficient professionals and regard themselves as competitive and focused on achieving results. The management style is one of adherence to routines that ensure predictability while simultaneously focusing on results. The environment is characterised by rigorous and clear procedures while also being competitive and emphasising the achievement of results. Success is defined in terms of maintaining daily activity, avoiding surprises, and is based on the number of courses running and the number of tasks achieved.
Both hierarchy and market cultures belong to the low quadrants of the Competing Values Framework, sharing the core dimension of the framework that emphasises value creation based on stability, order and control, rather than the upper quadrants, which highlight flexibility, discretion, and dynamism as value creation. This indicates that the SPU tends to be more focused on maintaining internal control and stability by emphasising the values created through standardised rules, regulations, and centralised decision making, as well as through a focus on achieving results.

Organisational culture congruence
In addition to types of culture, OCAI also assesses six cultural dimensions: the dominant characteristics of the organisation, the leadership style, the management of employees, the organisational glue, the strategic emphasis, and the criteria of success. The research results in the SPU also reveal cultural congruence, as they demonstrate how these various aspects of the organisation are aligned. For example, the means of most of the content dimensions of the organisational culture (leadership style, management of employees, organisational glue, strategic emphasis, and success criteria) emphasise the same set of values that belong to hierarchy and market culture. Furthermore, the parametric T-test for independent samples and one-way ANOVA indicate no statistically significant differences between most of the sub-groups of the demographic variables such as gender, age or experience, indicating the homogeneity of the academics' attitudes towards dominant organisational cultures.

Value creation from clan and adhocracy cultures preferred
Another important field of information that the OCAI offers is the discrepancy between the current culture and the culture that the organisation would prefer to have. To analyse the discrepancy from the results obtained through the OCAI questionnaire administered at the SPU, descriptive statistics were calculated for the 24 statements individually. The minimum mean of the items was 3.87 and the maximum 4.53, while the standard deviation ranged from .66 to 1.21. Furthermore, the 24 statements were grouped into four variables in SPSS by placing the six designated statements in each variable representing clan preferred, adhocracy preferred, market preferred, and hierarchy preferred culture. The mean for the grouped variables under the column 'Preferred' was as follows: adhocracy (4.37), market (4.37), clan (4.33) and hierarchy (4.38). To 'look for the widest differences in what is preferred versus what is now' , the mean difference between the statements assessed under the columns 'Preferred' and 'Now' were then calculated (Cameron & Quinn, 2011, p. 82). Although the respondents rated all quadrants similarly high for their preferred culture types, the research results at the SPU revealed a difference between the preferred culture and the culture now. The highest mean difference is between clan culture preferred and clan culture now (1.62), followed by adhocracy preferred and adhocracy now (1.56) (see Table 2). The results show that the SPU staff prefer to increase value creation from clan and adhocracy cultures, with the main characteristics of teamwork, employee involvement programmes and university commitment to employees (clan), as well as value creation focused on dynamism, innovation and the acceptance of new challenges (adhocracy). These assumptions and values represent the opposite of the values that are related to hierarchy and market culture for the content dimensions scored as of now, while also reflecting a discrepancy between the current organisational culture at the SPU and what the academics would like to the culture be, based on which academic leaders can also '[…] determine a roadmap for change' (Cameron & Quinn, 2011, p. 82).

Planned changes insufficiently aligned with dominant organisational culture types
Document analysis shows that eight strategic areas of focus were defined in the SPU Strategy 2017-2019: teaching, research and service; accreditation and quality control; market-driven degrees, human resources development; system development; fiscal accountability; improvement of financial data information; and globalisation/internationalisation. Some of the planned changes under these areas include the introduction of new teaching methodologies, providing faculty development in pedagogy, encouraging the continuous capacity building of teaching staff, developing PhD programmes in compliance with the Bologna system, increasing and improving research output, taking advantage of new technology, and implementing degree/study programmes in English. These changes were planned to take place within three years, and the action plan was also included in the SPU Strategic Plan 2017-2019. This large and diverse number of objectives may have been influenced by the 'Kosovo Education Strategic Plan, 2017-2021' , which also aims to address many prevailing challenges in higher education.
Further, the vision and mission of the SPU were analysed to understand how they reflect these planned changes. A mission expresses the core values of an organisation, and mission statements and intentions for decision making are considered the basis of the formulation of a university's goals and possibly of its strategies (Sporn, 1996;Tierney, 1987;). The vision and mission of the SPU, which is published on the university website and is part of the strategic plan 2017-2019, reads as follows: Vision: 'The SPU will become a respected public research university, recognised globally for its professionalism, integrity, quality teaching, and research. With an eye towards the future, the SPU will set a new quality standard for higher education in Southern Europe. We will provide our students with world-leading opportunities for learning and discovery. We will set high standards in teaching, scholarship, research and creative work for our teachers and researchers. We will be the engine that drives Kosovo's progress in the 21 st century. ' Mission: 'The university is an autonomous public institution for higher education, which develops academic education, scientific research, artistic work and professional counselling, and offer fields of academic activities. ' (SPU Strategy 2017-2019 The vision and mission of the SPU are apparently related to numerous disconnected objectives concentrated in both internal and external effectiveness and are aimed to be achieved within the rather short period of two to four years. Such a broad definition of the vision and mission will also represent a difficulty in communicating the vision and mission to stakeholders and members of the SPU to gain their support. It also implies the necessity to prioritise the objectives and define key performance indicators to be able to reflect them in a more realistic and concise vision and mission. Sporn (1996) explains that if, for example, 'the culture is more internally focused and has decentralised characteristics, the mission as well as intentions will concentrate on internal effectiveness and autonomy of departments' (p. 47). Sporn suggests that goal and strategy formulation should be limited to certain alternatives that fit the culture.
Overall, the findings show that most of the changes included in the SPU strategic plan represent deep or transformation change that will take a long time to be implemented, from 10 to 15 years (Kezar, 2009, p. 21). It also indicates that these types of changes are not sufficiently aligned with SPU dominant hierarchy and market cultures. According to the Competing Values Framework, the identified dominant hierarchy and market culture types will enable the SPU to focus more on small incremental changes that emphasise efficiency, predictability, and continuity, rather than on changes that are new, innovative, unique, and transformational, which are more supported by adhocracy culture. Regarding the approach to change, based on its dominant market culture, the SPU will be able to create short-term, immediate change rather than the long-term, developmental and sustained change that is more strongly supported by clan culture (see Figure 1).

Conclusions
The overall findings confirm that the Competing Values Framework and OCAI represent a helpful instrument in identifying not only the dominant organisational culture types but also in determining how the organisational culture is related to the planned changes in higher education institutions. Furthermore, the results support the relevance of the Competing Values Framework and OCAI in higher education institutions, as it has been mainly used to assess organisational culture in business and other organisations.
The present study does not intend to promote the idea that organisational culture alone may solve the problems related to planning changes in higher education institutions. Instead, it argues that in addition to other factors, some of which may be specific to developing countries, the role of organisational culture must also be considered when deciding about the types of changes that will be implemented. This research revealed a discrepancy between the identified hierarchy and market cultures and the planned changes in the SPU. It shows that the scope and content of the planned changes are insufficiently related to the existing dominant cultures in the SPU; or better, the university has not appropriately aligned the scope and content of the planned changes with the existing culture of the university. According to the Competing Values Framework, hierarchy culture is more appropriate for controlled incremental changes, while market culture supports rapid changes. In contrast, most of the changes included in the SPU Strategic Plan are long-term, transformational, and new changes, which are best supported by clan and adhocracy cultures. Overall, the main characteristics of hierarchy and market cultures, which in the present research were identified as the present dominant cultures of the SPU, militate against the changes that the university has planned to implement.
The current scope and content of transformational changes as planned by the SPU would be significantly supported if the academic leaders considered changing the organisational culture. This does not mean that they should diminish the elements of hierarchy and market cultures, such as measurement, holding people responsible, following the rules, monitoring performance, listening to third parties, retaining quality standards and competing with other universities. A cultural change programme would, however, enable academic leaders to increase elements of clan and adhocracy cultures, such as more participation and involvement of academics, more cross-functional teamwork and horizontal communication, a more caring climate, more suggestions from academics, more process innovativeness, and thoughtful risk-taking (Cameron & Quinn, 2011, p. 125). Overall, the organisational culture change could act as a bridge to support the transformational planned changes being implemented more easily, effectively and quickly. One advantage of the SPU in this regard is that clan and adhocracy cultures are the preferred cultures of its academics. This attitude of academics toward preferred clan and adhocracy cultures would significantly facilitate a possible SPU cultural change programme in the future.

Limitations
Although the findings present valid and reliable data for the Studied Public University, the limited sample does not allow for generalising the findings. Insofar as all public higher education institutions in Kosovo function within the same state regulations and in a similar cultural context, the findings could also be relevant to discussions related to other public universities. However, specific differences governing other similar institutions in Kosovo could lead to somewhat different results.