大學校長韌性領導的公共價值實踐：災後校務治理之個案研究

Enacting Public Value Through University Presidents’ Resilient Leadership: A Case Study of Post-Disaster Governance

本研究旨在探討大學校長於災後校務治理情境中的韌性領導實踐，以了解校長如何在高度不確定條件下，透過具體治理作為維持制度秩序、回應公共責任，並促使災後治理由危機應變逐步走向制度修補與治理重整。研究採質性個案研究法，以一所曾遭逢重大災害衝擊之大學為研究對象，透過半結構式深度訪談與文件資料分析，探究大學校長於災後校務治理中的韌性領導實踐。研究結論如下：一、校長能迅速完成決策定錨，並透過程序透明與說明責任建立治理正當性；二、校長能透過跨單位協調與系統整合，將分散資訊、部門作為與多元壓力重新組織為可共同推進之治理行動；三、公共價值並非災後治理完成後之外加評價，而是具體展現在安全照顧、可回應機制與制度信任修補之中；四、災後治理之深層意義在於校長能將危機經驗轉化為制度修補、備援思維與治理重整之契機。整體而言，大學校長之韌性領導並非僅限於危機情境下的即時應變，而是透過決策定錨、跨域協調、安全照顧與制度修補，使公共價值得以內嵌於災後校務治理歷程之中。

This study examines university presidents’ resilient leadership practices in post-disaster university governance, with particular attention to how presidents, under conditions of high uncertainty, sustain institutional order and fulfill public responsibility through concrete governance actions, thereby enabling post-disaster governance to move gradually from crisis response toward institutional repair and governance reconfiguration. Adopting a qualitative case study design, the research investigates a university that experienced a major post-disaster shock. Data were collected through semi-structured in-depth interviews and document analysis to explore how resilient leadership was enacted in the post-disaster governance process. Four findings are identified. First, the president rapidly anchored decision-making and established governance legitimacy through procedural transparency and accountability-oriented communication. Second, through cross-unit coordination and system integration, the president reorganized fragmented information, departmental actions, and multiple pressures into collectively actionable governance efforts. Third, public value was not an add-on evaluation after post-disaster governance was completed; rather, it was enacted through safety and care provisions, responsive mechanisms, and the repair of institutional trust. Fourth, the deeper significance of post-disaster governance lay in the president’s capacity to transform crisis experience into opportunities for institutional repair, contingency-oriented thinking, and governance reconfiguration. Overall, university presidents’ resilient leadership is not limited to immediate crisis response; rather, through decision anchoring, cross-boundary coordination, safety and care provision, and institutional repair, it embeds public value within the process of post-disaster university governance.