Article Details
Vol. 7 No. 4 (2026): May
Does Age Matter? A Behavioral Contingency Approach to University Governance
Abstract
Purpose: The objective of this study is to examine how age, acting as a metacognitive contingency factor, influences decision-making processes in university governance and affects the perceived organizational performance of Moroccan universities. The research aims to shift the focus from traditional financial metrics to behavioral factors, such as cognitive and metacognitive processes, to understand how they guide the actions of decision-makers
Research Methodology: This study was conducted in Moroccan universities using a quantitative research design and a positivist epistemological stance. Data were collected via a structured survey questionnaire administered through Microsoft Forms over a five-month period, resulting in 163 valid responses from academic and administrative actors. The sample size was determined using Slovin’s formula (1960). Data analysis was performed using Jamovi software.
Results: The empirical findings indicate that chronological age has no statistically significant direct impact on performance indicators, such as working conditions, communication quality, or satisfaction. In contrast, professional experience showed a significant positive relationship with communication quality but a negative correlation with overall satisfaction. Furthermore, the perceived openness to change of young administrators was found to be positively associated with working conditions
Conclusions: The study concludes that biological age is not a direct determinant of organizational performance outcomes within the Moroccan university context. Instead, factors like professional experience and specific perceptions of administrative attitudes (such as openness to change) are more influential drivers of performance perceptions. Age may function as a moderating variable that influences cognitive processes indirectly or in a context-dependent manner
Limitations: primary limitation of this study is the sample size of 163 responses from a total population of 38,556, which results in an estimated margin of error of approximately 7.8%, requiring the results to be interpreted with caution. While the literature recognizes that multiple behavioral determinants such as academic background may shape leadership practices, this study deliberately concentrates on age as the principal behavioral contingency variable.
Contributions: This study advances Management Science and University Governance by applying Behavioral Contingency
Theory to higher education. It underscores that leaders’ cognitive profiles and experiences are as critical as material resources in shaping governance, while illuminating the psychological drivers of decision-making in the Moroccan university context.
Keywords
How to Cite
Download Citation
References
- Abdessalam, N. W., & Houda, B. (2023). Understanding the decision-making from a cognitive and metacognitive perspective: A theoretical framework. Int. J. Econ. Stud. Manag, 3(6), 1772-1786. doi:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10203891
- Ate?, N. Y., Tarakci, M., Porck, J. P., van Knippenberg, D., & Groenen, P. J. (2020). The dark side of visionary leadership in strategy implementation: Strategic alignment, strategic consensus, and commitment. Journal of Management, 46(5), 637-665. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318811567
- Barney, J. B. (2018). Why resource?based theory's model of profit appropriation must incorporate a stakeholder perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 39(13), 3305-3325. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2949
- Chater, N., & Loewenstein, G. (2023). The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 46, 1-60. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X22002023
- Christensen, J., Dahlmann, C. M., Mathiasen, A. H., Moynihan, D. P., & Petersen, N. B. G. (2018). How do elected officials evaluate performance? Goal preferences, governance preferences, and the process of goal reprioritization. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(2), 197-211. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muy001
- Cristofaro, M. (2017). Reducing biases of decision-making processes in complex organizations. Management Research Review, 40(3), 270-291. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-03-2016-0054
- Cristofaro, M., Augier, M., Lovallo, D., Abatecola, G., & Leoni, L. (2024). Behavioral strategy in evolution: A review and conceptual framework. European Management Journal, 43(6), 914-932. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2024.10.002
- Cristofaro, M., & Giardino, P. L. (2020). Core self-evaluations, self-leadership, and the self-serving bias in managerial decision making: a laboratory experiment. Administrative Sciences, 10(3), 64. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci10030064
- Del Missier, F., Hansson, P., Parker, A. M., Bruine de Bruin, W., & Mäntylä, T. (2020). Decision-making competence in older adults: A rosy view from a longitudinal investigation. Psychology and Aging, 35(4), 553. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000443
- El bakkouchi, Y., & EL bakkouchi, M. (2023). L’effet du facteur stratégie sur la performance organisationnelle des établissements universitaires marocains: selon la théorie de contingence. International Journal of Accounting Finance Auditing Management and Economics, 4(3-2), 104-120.
- Errachidi, A., & El Fakir, E. (2023). Les déterminants de la gouvernance entrepreneuriale au milieu universitaire: Cas du Maroc. International Journal of Accounting Finance Auditing Management and Economics, 4(5-2), 195-206.
- Eton, M., Ocan, J., Agea, J. G., Okello-Obura, C., Mwosi, F., & Ogwel, B. P. (2026). Financial inclusion and governance challenges in higher education compared, perspectives from state universities. Journal of Social, Humanity, and Education, 6(2), 223-239. doi:https://doi.org/10.35912/jshe.v6i2.3717
- Fasolo, B., Heard, C., & Scopelliti, I. (2025). Mitigating cognitive bias to improve organizational decisions: An integrative review, framework, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 51(6), 2182-2211. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063241287188
- Feryanto, M., Mulyanti, R. Y., & Soma, A. M. (2025). The effect of training and work experience on performance: The mediating role of competence at PT Chandra Asri Pacific. Annals of Human Resource Management Research, 5(3), 181-194. doi:https://doi.org/10.35912/ahrmr.v5i3.3249
- Ghorbani, A., & Blankesteijn, M. L. (2025). Governance arrangements for academic entrepreneurship: structures, processes, and mechanisms. Management Review Quarterly, 1-44. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-025-00562-0
- Guindalini, C., Verreynne, M.-L., & Kastelle, T. (2021). Taking scientific inventions to market: Mapping the academic entrepreneurship ecosystem. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173, 121144. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121144
- Hallinger, P., & Chatpinyakoop, C. (2019). A bibliometric review of research on higher education for sustainable development, 1998–2018. Sustainability, 11(8), 2401. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082401?urlappend=%3Futm_source%3Dresearchgate.net%26utm_medium%3Darticle
- Heikkinen, S., Saqr, M., Malmberg, J., & Tedre, M. (2023). Supporting self-regulated learning with learning analytics interventions–a systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies, 28(3), 3059-3088. doi:https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1738740/v1
- Hijazi, A. A., Das, P., Li, Y., Moehler, R. C., & Maxwell, D. W. (2026). A contingency approach to platform implementation: Platform types, attributes, and value chain integration. Building Research & Information, 54(1), 4-23. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2025.2510270
- Hitt, M. A., Xu, K., & Carnes, C. M. (2016). Resource based theory in operations management research. Journal of Operations Management, 41(1), 77-94. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2015.11.002
- Huy, Q., & Zott, C. (2019). Exploring the affective underpinnings of dynamic managerial capabilities: How managers' emotion regulation behaviors mobilize resources for their firms. Strategic Management Journal, 40(1), 28-54. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2971
- Klugah, G. E., Korang, V., Essilfie, F. R., & Zingnaa Iddrisu, M. A. (2025). The mediating role of succession issues in succession planning, family influence and successor attributes on SME performance in emerging economies. Cogent Business & Management, 12(1), 2551282. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2551282
- Maassen, P., & Stensaker, B. (2019). From organised anarchy to de?coupled bureaucracy: The transformation of university organisation. Higher Education Quarterly, 73(4), 456-468. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12229
- Midtgård, K., & Selart, M. (2025). Cognitive biases in strategic decision-making. Administrative Sciences, 15(6), 227. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci15060227?urlappend=%3Futm_source%3Dresearchgate.net%26utm_medium%3Darticle
- Mohe, E. (2025). Contingency factors in management control and organizational performance of Cameroonian SMEs. Journal of Economics Management and Trade, 31(8), 74-98. doi:https://doi.org/10.9734/jemt/2025/v31i81335
- Najeh, W. A., Aya, M., & Houda, B. (2025). Understanding university governance dynamics through the behavioral approach and metacognitive factors: evidence from Morocco. African Scientific Journal, 3(31), 727-746. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16895989
- Noe, R. A., Clarke, A. D., & Klein, H. J. (2014). Learning in the twenty-first-century workplace. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav., 1(1), 245-275. doi:https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091321
- Novialumi, A., & Winata, S. D. (2025). The impact of compensation on job satisfaction: Work experience and education relationship. Annals of Human Resource Management Research, 5(3), 69-81. doi:https://doi.org/10.35912/ahrmr.v5i3.2888
- Pierre, A., & Fernandez, A.-S. (2018). Capacités dynamiques et innovation en PME: analyse d’un cas d’échec. Revue internationale PME, 31(3), 131-165. doi:https://doi.org/10.7202/1054421ar
- Ruel, S. (2019). Du passage d’une contingence structurelle à une contingence comportementale ou de l’intérêt des pratiques de gestion et d’actualisation des connaissances en supply chain. Logistique & Management, 27(3), 192-205. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/12507970.2019.1580620
- ?ahin, M., & Aybek, E. (2019). Jamovi: an easy to use statistical software for the social scientists. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 6(4), 670-692. doi:https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.661803
- Sain, Z. H., Eko, G., & Lawal, U. S. (2025). Balancing Rationality and Uncertainty: A Contingency Theory Perspective on Organizational Adaptation. International Journal of Education Management and Technology, 3(1), 288-307. doi:https://doi.org/10.58578/ijemt.v3i1.5001
- Saputro, K., & Syaebani, M. I. (2024). The influence of pre-training factors on training effectiveness mediated by motivation to learn, motivation to transfer, and self-efficacy–case study on non-ministerial government institutions. Quantitative Economics and Management Studies, 5(3), 658-669. doi:https://doi.org/10.35877/454RI.qems2646
- Serfling, M. A. (2014). CEO age and the riskiness of corporate policies. Journal of Corporate Finance, 25, 251-273. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2013.12.013
- Shattock, M. (2017). University governance in flux. The impact of external and internal pressures on the distribution of authority within British universities: A synoptic view. Higher Education Quarterly, 71(4), 384-395. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12132
- Sunstein, C. R. (2020). Behavioral Science and Public Policy: Cambridge University Press.
- Teece, D. J. (2018). Dynamic capabilities as (workable) management systems theory. Journal of Management & Organization, 24(3), 359-368. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/jmo.2017.75
- Trakman, L. (2008). Modelling university governance. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(1?2), 63-83. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00384.x
- Vial, G. (2021). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. Managing Digital Transformation, 23(2), 13-66. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.