13_jwe_3-4 final UDC: 005.57:371 ; 371.113:316.77 JEL: I21, I29 ID: 203435020 RESEARCH WORK, REVIEW Innovative Management in Education Using Communication Instruments Čukanović Karavidić Marija1, Karavidić Slavko, Gavrić Gordana Faculty of BE and Entrepreneurshi, Belgrade A B S T R A C T In paper titled Innovative management in education using communication instruments is recorded existed communication practice and possible ways of its improvement in the educational system, seen through the prism of global and social changes. New strategies in application communication instruments should contribute easier adaptation of educational system to changes which are result of changed way of business and needs of environment for education. Empirical research which is carried out disproved that educational institutions use some kind of communication, professors recognize importance of changing information, but in the same time don’t give significant support to placed it in the public KEYWORDS: innovations, communication, management, organizational changes Introduction Generally speaking, world is continuously changing and education is the key factor of those changes. New acknowledgements discover new horizons and require new efforts in the implementation of those changes. Also, as the needs of a user expand, thus the trends which follow the changes and needs also grow. 1 E-mail: cukanovickaravidicmarija@gmail.com Čukanović Karavidić, M, et al., Innovative Management, JWE (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 89 Therefore, deep changes in doctrine and the application of management in education are necessary. In order to meet the requests which characterize a modern business it is necessary to use the concept of the active innovative management whose key of success is in the integration and communication, by applying the corresponding communication technology and communication instruments. Education has a significant role in the creating of society as well as the relations in society and the influence on the socially-economical level of its development. There are 3 points where they meet: the quality of education effects; the quality of the inner components of the process of education; the orientation of the education towards the development of qualities as the features of a certain level and value – the goal towards which the education is directed. Jacques Delors, in his explanation of the conclusions of the International education commity for 12th century, underlines: education is not just one of many development instruments, but it is also one of its consisting parts and one of its crucial goals. The goal is that the education institutions position themselves as reliable, organized and innovative institution which follows contemporary trends of education and in a qualitative manner meets the needs of the user and the society in general. High level of integration is necessary for realization of that aim- both horizontal and vertical. That imposes huge number of questions. Does the education in Serbia integrate “densely”? No! This has caused crisis of results, values and morality crisis. Who is the best representative of education- its problems and possibilities? It could be educational institutions, employees or students. Does the government (on state and local level) listen to their problems at work? No! Discrepancies between the system and sub-system of education have caused the disintegration that is manifested problems. How much time and energy managers in education spend in attending transparency, openness and integrity between employees? It’s a very little time. Do the parents take an active part in children’s education? No! And more other questions without answers. 90 Journal of Women's Entrepreneurship and Education (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) If the disintegration is the cause of problems, what is the cure? Integration! One of the best ways to reach the integration and manage changes is to achieve different aims using effective communication by applying communication instruments - establish, keep and improve relations between participants in education. If we want to realize necessary changes in education, we need to change the way we think about them. Opinions and attitudes about education, application of communication technics and instruments and implementation new model of communication in education we checked by empirical researches presented in this paper. To obtain answers it was necessary to conduct an analysis of data and find answers to the following questions: 1. Do the schools plan communication? 2. Who is recognized as a target group by schools in communication? 3. What message is sent by schools to external public? 4. What are the new communication channels? From the viewpoint of communication, it was very significant to consider the field of Ethos. For the purpose of this analysis targeted was to monitor the field directed both internal and external communication. The area ethos consists of the following sub-fields and data validation: a) school reputation and promotion − reputation and features of schools; − expectations and success promotion; − culture behaviour. b) ambience and interpersonal relationships − respect of a person; − equality and justness; − aesthetic and functional organization of school facilities. c) Partnership with parents, school board and local community − communication with parents; − implementation of parents in school life and work and school learning; − relationship between the school and school board; − school role in local community. Čukanović Karavidić, M, et al., Innovative Management, JWE (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 91 Methological Framework of Research Research subject: Planning and creating communication in education: do the schools plan their comunication; who is recognized as a target groups; do they send messages to „external“ public and what that messages consist of; as well as what is the channels of communication? Main research objective: Introducing transparency in institutions, and implementation of new types of communications which are based on permanent communication with target public, represent a new approach to communication in educational institutions in Serbia. Specific research objective: explore attitudes and opinions of employees in education institution about: openness in communication, type and needs in public approachable data and directedness information about school. Sample of research: Sample size was 117 primary schools (71, 3%) and 47 (28,7%) high schools, and by type of place where is the school located, in research participated 107 urban schools (65%) and 57 rural schools (35%). Sample size was 1269 examinees. Sample structure: 834 (65, 7%) examinees from primary schools and 435 (34,3%) from high school. From rural area are 438 (34,5%) teachers and from urban schools 831 (65,5%) teachers. According to gender structure 427 (33, 6%) examinees are male and 818 (64,5%) female, while 24 (1,9%) is not endorsed belonging sex. Age categories: 10% is from 20 to 30 years old, one-third of examinees are from 31 to 40 years old, the second-third are 41-50 years old, and the rest of examinees are over 50 years old. According to position in school almost 70% examinees are teachers in older classes, about 15% teachers in younger classes and 15% are directors or research associate. The Analysis and the Research Interpretation The Selection of Subsections to Which Schools Pay Most Attention Regarding the monitored indicators ((table 1) schools mentioned two sections each) it appeared that schools pay most attention to the evaluation of the atmosphere and the interpersonal relationships in the organization (33 92 Journal of Women's Entrepreneurship and Education (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) schools), while the insignificantly less attention was dedicated to the reputation and promotion of the school (26) and partnership (22). Table 1: Chosing of subsections in valuation section Subsection Number of choices % % of choices School program and annual work program School program 16 4,2 12,8 Annual work program 22 5,8 17,6 Teaching process and learning Planning and preparing 28 7,4 22,4 Teaching process 27 7,1 21,6 Learning 18 4,8 14,4 Follow the improvement of students 20 5,3 16,0 School achievements Quality of school achievements 24 6,3 19,2 Support to participants Care for students 20 5,3 16,0 Learning support 16 4,2 12,8 Personal and social development 15 4,0 12,0 Professional orientation 14 3,7 11,2 Ethos Reputation and promotion of school 26 6,9 20,8 Ambience and interpersonal relationships 33 8,7 26,4 Partnership with parents, SB (school board) and LC (local community) 22 5,8 17,6 Resources Human resources 21 5,6 16,8 Materially tehnical resources 26 6,9 20,8 Financial resources 16 4,2 12,8 Leadership, organization and quality assurance Leadership 5 1,3 4,0 Organization of school work 4 1,1 3,2 Quality assurance 2 0,5 1,6 School plan development 3 0,8 2,4 Total number of choices 378 100,0 302,4 Planning of Key Activities for the Improvement of School Work These relate first of all to the improvement of reputation and promotion of school (38,5%), then partnership with parents, school board Čukanović Karavidić, M, et al., Innovative Management, JWE (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 93 and local community (23,1%) and, at the end, ambience and interpersonal relationship (28,2%). In order to determine strategies to achive improvement in those filds, we need to determine planning activities for reaching aims in three subsections, related to communication in organization and communication with certain groups in public and public communications (school promotion). Partnership with Parents, School Board and Local Community On graph 1 we can see that 31 school planned activities with different participants in education, but firstly with parents (16). Graph 1: Partnership - high school It is necessary: to increase the level of parents’ participation in school; to include parents in work and life of school via various educations; to modernize the parent meetings; to enable more active approach to parents in the realization of extracurricular activities; to involve parents and the members of a local community in the life of school via panels, lectures and organized meetings, to involve parents in the various school activities, to report to parents about various isues, for example, various purchases, to organize the Parents’ day for the participation in the teaching, to organize 94 Journal of Women's Entrepreneurship and Education (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) Open door day, as well as the active participation of parents in quizzes and literature evenings. It is also necessary to intensify the activities which refer to the cooperation of a school with other institutions (cultural and educational) and local municipality, (cooperation with schools in country and abroad, the improving of the coopeartion with local municipality). School Reputation and Promotion Graph number 2 shows that 21 schools want to improve school reputation and promotion without specification of any activities, while 13 schools specified specific activities as design of web site (10) and school magazine (3). Graph 2: Planned activities for improvement school reputation and promotion Who is Recognized as a Target Group by Schools in Communication? The focus of communication was monitored by the segment of Communication with environment, where schools explicitly state target groups through open question. To this question answered 82, 3% schools. Out of that, 131 (79,9%) stated one or more organizations with which cooperates successfully, while (2,4%) stated only general statement (communication with environment is satisfactory, communication with the Čukanović Karavidić, M, et al., Innovative Management, JWE (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 95 environment takes place continuously, communication with the environment is reciprocal, and in a very satisfactory level, the school ruled by good interpersonal relationships and good communication with the environment). Schools gave responses which could easily be grouped into several categories, which pointed out the type of cooperation and communication which they accomplish (graph 3.). Most of the schools, in total 97 of them (59,1%) stated that they accomplished a good communication with state administration (Ministry of education, including school commitee, Ministry of internal affairs and local municipality). Then there are, in the similar percentage, cultural institutions, sport institutions or communions (43,9%), health and social services (43,3%), other educational services (schools and universities), parents (36,6%), while at least are represented industry, media and sponsors, not more than one quarter (26,8%) out of total number of schools. The only difference is in the setup of highschools, which give more significance to the communication with the industry than with the other educational institutions, which is probably influenced by the number of trade schools which constitute the majority in the high school model. Graph 3: High school with environment 96 Journal of Women's Entrepreneurship and Education (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) What Message is Sent by Schools to External Public? Out of 164 schools, 30 schools (18,3%) have no response. The remaining 134 (81,7%) schools sent message to the public. Their messages were sent via two dimensions of message formation: structure (general / directed) and message contents. From the point of view of message structure, 91 schools (55,5%) sent a general message, while 43 schools (26,2%) had structurally specific messages (table 2) General messages in some cases represent a motto, vision and message which school sends to whole community. Only one quarter of schools (table 3) had targeted communication, by sending their messages specifically towards certain groups, first of all parents and students (17,1%) and decision makers (9,1%). Table 2: The message structure message structure frequency % Without message 30 18,3 General public 91 55,5 Target public 43 26,2 Total 164 100,0 Table 3: Directedness of messages Directedness of messages frequency % Without message 30 18,3 To whole public 91 55,5 To the parents and students 28 17,1 To decisions makers 15 9,1 Total 164 100,0 Messages related to decisions makers are primary an appeal to everyone who can obtain resources for school improvement and development. From the viewpoint of message content almost half from whole number of school sent message with rational appeal (56,7%), while one-fifth had message with emotional (12,8%) and one- fifth with moral appeal, and the rest were without message. Čukanović Karavidić, M, et al., Innovative Management, JWE (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 97 After analyzing the messages to the public, it can be said that the observed throught independent variables there are small differences that are not statistically significant, so we can say that no matter what type or size of the institution or place from which they come, schools prefer appeal to the general public and send them messages with rational appeal. New Communication Channels Does the school have a website and email? Out of 164 schools which participated in the research, they all have e- mails, but somewhat less than half of them, that is 66 schools, have their own websites (40,2%). Analyzing the structure of those who have website related to place where school is located and level and type of educational institution, it’s clear that the majority of schools that have website belong to urban area, although it is only 53,3% of the total number of schools in urban areas. The most unfavorable ratio is at rural schools, because only 15,8% schools in rural area have website. Regarding to level of education, 72,3% high schools have website, while the ratio of primary school is worse 27,3%. Graph 4: Schools and websites The scope of this research did not imply the school website analysis, but it is certainly a topic which can be started in the new researches. It 98 Journal of Women's Entrepreneurship and Education (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) would orient us towards how to use websites, the usability and the marketing orientation of schools. Table 4: The attitude of teachers about importance of school info to the public disagree undecided agree A b o u t s c h o o l General data about school 57 (4,5%) 120 (9,5%) 1038 (81,8%) About school environment 94 (7,4%) 91 (7,2%) 1106 (87,2%) About subjects and school activities 79 (6,2%) 31 (2,4%) 1203 (94,8%) About school safety 22 (1,7%) 77 (6,1%) 1095 (86,3%) About school specificities 55 (4,3%) 122 (9,6%) 1043 (82,2%) About experiments/projects 88 (6,9%) 55 (4,3%) 1003 (79,0%) A b o u t s t u d e n t s General data about students 153 (12,1%) 145 (11,4%) 946 (74,5%) About SES of students 174 (13,7%) 175 (13,8%) 874 (68,9%) About general students success 74 (5,8%) 66 (5,2%) 1122 (88,4%) About special (non) success 86 (6,8%) 113 (8,9%) 1056 (83,2%) About results of qualifying exams 67 (5,3%) 90 (7,1%) 1093 (86,1%) About special testing 123 (9,7%) 153 (12,1%) 973 (76,7%) About success and competitions 51 (4,0%) 58 (4,6%) 1148 (90,5%) A b o u t r e s About professors 146 (11,5%) 118 (9,3%) 997 (78,6%) About professors work experience 201 (15,8%) 146 (11,5%) 912 (71,9%) About competently training of professors 176 (13,9%) 124 (9,8%) 951 (74,9%) About financial resources 129 (10,2%) 140 (11,0%) 984 (77,5%) Čukanović Karavidić, M, et al., Innovative Management, JWE (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 99 o u r c e s About the use of financial founds 145 (11,6%) 130 (10,2%) 974 (76,8%) About external evaluation 117 (9,2%) 163 (12,8%) 972 (76,6%) About self-evaluation 156 (12,3%) 177 (13,9%) 922 (72,7%) About school development plan 119 (9,4%) 161 (12,7%) 978 (77,1%) The Attitude of Teachers About the Availability of School info to the Public First data group that is related to information about schools, include general information about school, and data about specific school and educational environment. It seems that teachers mostly agreed about the communication and information which referred to safety. Even 94,8% thinks that they are significant for public (Н 1256; М 4,88; a=0,60). More than 80% of teachers agree about the importance of the other info refering to the educational environment of a school. For example, there is a big compliance (87,2%) regarding the publishing of data about the specific features of a school (Н 1252; М 4,68; a=0,95). By researching the statistic importance of differences, it turned out that teachers from urban support it more (90,4%), than teachers from rural environments (84,5%) which record a higher percentage of indecision in that case (N 1252, x2=9,345; df 2; Sig 0,01, Cramer's V =0,09). Similar situation refers to the agreement about public information about subjects and activities in school (82, 3% ; N 1251, М 4,62; а =1,05). There is again confirmed that consist significant statistic difference in attitudes between areas in favor of urban area. For publishing of the info about the subjects and school activities more concurrent are teachers from urban (90,1%) than the teachers from rural areas (82,6%) (N 1251, x2 =17,72 ; df=2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V=0,12). There is also a big number of those who agreed about the school environment info 82,2% (N 1259; М 4,50; а=1,16) although here was the biggest number of dilemmas (9,6%). Those data are more supported by teachers from urban (86%), than rural areas (76,8%) (N 1259, x2=18,3052; df 2; Sig 0,01, Cramer's V=0,12), as well as the teachers from high schools 100 Journal of Women's Entrepreneurship and Education (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) (87,2%) in comparison to primary school (80,6%) (N 1259, df = 2; Sig 0,05; Cramer's V=0,10). Regaring experiments/projects data, note that 81,8% agreed, while 9,5% are indecisive (N 1246; М 4,52; a=1,14). Percentage of teachers who disagree with publishing these information is between 2% and 7%. It’s interesting to see that exist statistically significant differences in all three grups of observed variables. In relation to school boards, according to this question those who comes from schools with average achivements of students are more indecisive (11,5% у односу на 6,5%; N 1246; x2 =9,091; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V =0,09), but this is more supported by the teachers from urban areas (86,1%, against 78%; N 1246; x2 =21,708 df 2; Sig 0,01, Cramer's V =0,13) and high schools (87,3% against 81,2%; N 1246; x2=14,233; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V = 0,11). Least of examinees agreed that the info about school should be published (79%). If we know that less then one tenth of examinees aren’t sure about this question or they disagree, and 12,1% were omitted to indicate, the explanation of this result is maybe in fact that this is the first item and graphic don’t enough visible, which causes less percentage of answers. The second data group involves teacher’s attitudes about presentation information about students and their success. Big percentage of compliances (90,5%) refers to the presentation of the students’ achievment on the competitons (N 1257; М 4,75; a=0,88) – from urban environments (93,3%) on contrary to 87,6% from rural environments (N 1257, x2 =12,1642 ; df 2; Sig 0,01, Cramer's V=0,10). In total 88,4% of teachers agree that it is important for the public to present general achievement of students (N 1262; М 4,66; a=1,02). That is how there is a bigger percentage of teachers from urban environments 92,1%, on contrary to teachers from rural environments 82,8% (N 1262, x2 =29,4792 ; df 2; Sig 0,01, Cramer's V=0,15). It is also something that highschool teachers would gladly talk about 92,8%, on contrary to primary school teachers 86,9% (N 1262; x2=11,5602; df 2; Sig 0,05; Cramer's V=0,10). Also, there is somewhat less concordance among teachers (86,1%) regarding publishing of the qualifying examination results (N 1250; М 4,64; а=1,01), particular success or failure (83,2%; N 1255; М 4,54; a=1,12) and information about particular testing (76,7%; N 1249; М 4,36; а=1,29), where was noted higher percentage of acceptance at high school teachers Čukanović Karavidić, M, et al., Innovative Management, JWE (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 101 (82%) compared with primary school (75,8%, N 1249, x2=6,729; df 2; Sig 0,05, Cramer's V =0,07). In these categories were the least indecisive. Most of the discordances, as well as the indecisive choices referred to the general data about the students and the data about the socially- economical status of students. Although 74,5 % of students thought that the data about the students were important to the public, even 12,1% did not agree with that, аnd 11,4% was indecisive (N 1244; М 4,27; a=1,38). Out of teachers which support it, greater percentage comes from highschools 81,8%, than from primary schools 73% (N 1244, x2= 9,282 ; df 2; Sig 0,05; Cramer's V=0,10). The situation with the publishing of the data about the socially- economical status of students is even more disadvantageous. While 68,9% (N 1223; М 4,14; a=1,45) of teachers agreed that those were the data important for the public, even one thirt of all teachers does not agree with that (13,7%) or they are indecisive (13,8%), regardless of the kind of educational institution where they come from, or on the other hand, the size of the environment. The only noted difference is between schools boards. Thus, teachers from schools that achieved average on national testing are more ready to publishing data about socially-economical status of students (73,8%) than schools from schools boards where were students attain better achivements (67,5%) (N 1223, x2 =6,992; df 2; Sig 0,05, Cramer's V=0,08). According to all this categories, exist statistically significant differences between the dimensions of urban and rural areas. Very similar situation is in the rest data categories: data about particular success or failure, 86,6% from urban agains 79,4% rural area (N 1255, x2 =10,954 df 2; Sig 0,05, Cramer's V =0,09); data about qualifying examination results, 89,1% from urban, against 84,3% from rural area (N 1250, х2=13,484 df 2; Sig 0,01, Cramer's V=0,10); data about particular testings, 80,9% from urban, against 72,4% from rural area (N 1249, x2 =12,693 df 2; Sig 0,01, Cramer's V=0,10), data about success on the competitions, 93,3% from the urban against to 87,6% from rural area (N 1257, х2 =12,164; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V=0,10). The third group of data refers to the human and financial resources in schools. Within this group of data there is a lowest degree of discordance between teachers and it is from 71% and 79%. It can be said that they mostly agree about the significance of the data which refer to HR (78,6%; N 102 Journal of Women's Entrepreneurship and Education (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 1261; М 4,35; a=1,34), financial resources (77,5%; N 1253; М 4,36; a=1,30) and the data about the school development plan (77,1%; N 1258; М 4,36; a=1,27). Then there are info about the expenditure of the financial assets (76,8%; N 1249; М 4,33; a=1,35) and the external evaluation (76,6%; N 1252; М 4,36; a=1,27), specialized training of teachers (74,9%; N 1251; М 4,24; a=1,44), work experience of teachers (71,9%; N 1259; М 4,13; a=1,50), as well as the school self-evaluation (72,7%; N 1255; М 4,22; a=1,40). The percentage of those who are agree, and that is there abstemiously high and ranging between 72% and 75%, the most of them are those who disagree or indecisive with statements that are relation on data about self- evaluation school (12,3% are disagree and 13,9% are indecisive), work expirience of teachers (15,8 are disagree and 11,5% are indecisive) and specialized training of teachers (13,9 are disagree and 9,8% are indecisive). This result announced possibly higher variability within groups in three dimensions, what was realized afterwards. Regarding the publishing of general data about the teachers, school teachers with higher achievements of students unexpectedly do not agree more about this issue (14,6%) than the teachers from schools with average achievements (9,8%) (N 1261, x2 =9,1802 ; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V =0,09). Publishing is also supported by the bigger percentage of high school teachers (88,2%), than primary school teachers (74,3%) (N 1261, x2 =33,9102; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V =0,16) and more approved by teachers from urban (82,8%), than rural environments (72,0%) (N 1261, х2 =20,422; d f 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V =0,13). It is a little bit different situation in relation to data about work experience of teachers. Teachers from schools bords with average achivements of students are more agree with that (75,4%),, while the teachers from schools boards with achivements over average are more distanted about that (67,5%) (N 1259, х2=9,267; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V=0,09). In data about work expiriance of teachers and specialized training of teachers exist differences within dimensions of education and size of settlements. Then, teachers from high school give more support to data about work expirience (77,8%) against primary school (69,6%) (N 1259, х2 =13,278; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V=0,10), as in urban area (77,1%) against rural area (63,7%) ( N 1259, х2=27,117; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V=0,15). Čukanović Karavidić, M, et al., Innovative Management, JWE (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 103 It is a similar situation with the specialized training of students, where the data about it are more supported by teachers from highschools 82,1% in relation to primary schools 72,8% (N 1251, х2 =14,3212; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V =0,11), also more in urban (80,3%) than in rural environments (67,9%) (N 1251, х2 =24,3212; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V =0,14). The group of data which referred to the evaluation divided teachers only regarding the size of the environment where they come from. Accordingly, the data about the external evaluation are more welcomed in the category of urban environment (81,4%) in comparison to rural one 70,5% (N 1252, х2 =19,5922 ; df 2; Sig 0,01, Cramer's V =0,13), somewhat less in relation to the data about the school development plan, 80,3% on contrary to 72,8% (Н 1258, х2 =9,3592 ; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V=0,09), while the smallest difference is regarding the data about the self-evaluation (76,5% on contrary to 67,7%; N 1255, х2 =12,1902 ; df 2; Sig 0,01; Cramer's V=0,10). The Attitude of Teachers about Directedness of School Information The attitude of teachers about target groups which should know data of schools and their internal and external activities were researched by questionnaire too. Because of possibility of circling more then one answer, there were 6574 choices. On graph 5 are choices data. The greatest number of choices related to decision makers (86,68%) and school board as an administrative unit of the state government (85,60%), than school board (79,28%), parents (73,52%) and local government (69,11%). Over half belive that data should be public for the media (63,12%), and rest belive that data should be public for the students too (48,38%). One third as a target group see total citizen (27,27%), while the economics operators as a target group are on the last place with only 11,26%. The last question was about identification of target groups which can have the most advantages of having access to information. Graph 5 shows that half of examinees state that the most advantages could have decision makers (46,1% from the total number of examinees). School board (29,6%) and parents (28,0%) are almost equal and local government with 20, 8%. Significantly less number of teachers were identify students (11%) and school board (8,5%) as a target groups, and very little of them saw the economics operators (3%), citizens (2,6%) and media (0,4%) as a users of information. 104 Journal of Women's Entrepreneurship and Education (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) Graph 5: Targeted groups which should have access to information The Attitudes of the Teachers Regarding Target Groups Which Can Have the Biggest Advantage from Having Insight to the Offered Information Half of the examinees stated that the biggest advantage can have the decision makers (46,1% out of total number of examinees). School commitee (29,6%) and teachers (28,0%) are almost equal, and then comes local municipality with 20,8%. Significantly smaller number of teachers identified students (11%) and school board (8,5%), and negligible number identified businessmen (3%), citizenship (2,6%) and media (0,4%) as users. Graph 6: Targeted groups which can have the most adventages Čukanović Karavidić, M, et al., Innovative Management, JWE (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 105 Education Management Knowledge Test We believed that this research would not be complete if we do not come to certain acknowledgements through education management knowledge test as neccessary to manage the innovative processes in education. In that sense a research was done (a knowledge test) among 70 managing directors of the educational institutions, in the area of education management – test of basic skills, procedures, functions and the practice of management in education. By statistic analysis of the education management test results and the importance of the test points the following results were obtained: − Number of questions in the test: 14; − Maximum number of points in the test: 21; − The highest score: 13; − The lowest score: 1; − The number of examinees which got 50% and more points in the test: 11 (here are calculated also the examinees who achieved score 10). It is important to mention that to some of the questions a number of examinees did not answer (even 13 out of 14 questions, which is the number of total questions in the test, were unanswered by a number of examinees). A great majority of principals found the excuse in their lack of information about the literature from which they can meet with the education management. Considering that in addition to particular tasks necessary for the successful management of educational institutions certain psychological predispositions are also necessary, that is psychological characteristics: communication competence, emotional stability, conscientiousness, responsibility, intelectual efficiency, data processing speed, etc, it is necessary to convey the additional examinations, which will be helpful for the more precise defining of the preferrable profit of manager/principal, as well as the defining of more precise criteria for the evaluation of the capability. Conclusion Complex reality requires a dynamic school which will flexibly adapt to the demands of society in order that young people prepare themselves 106 Journal of Women's Entrepreneurship and Education (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) properly for the world of frequent and permanent changes and to be capable to find their own place in such a world. The above mentioned implies that the quality standards of education institutions are to be raised in accordance to the always growing requests and expectations of the users, to demonstrate transparency in work and social responsibility from one side and to give positive and innovative responses to the requests of the society on the other side. Educational institutions and their employees gradually start to develop sensitivity towards various kinds of changes, especially the changes which relate to the accomplishment of the progress in communication with the environment in order to develop partnership relations and integrations with the social community. Empirical research implies that: educational institutions use certain forms of communication, teachers recognize the importans of the information exchange, but in the same do not support significantly their placement to the public. The obtained results say that teachers see the school data first of all as „rendering of accounts" to the authorities on a national level, because both the local and the school level are almost neglected. Except parents, which are the main interlocutors in communication, the other users are not identified as the target groups which could benefit from the offered information, not even students as the most direct users. On one hand it can mean that teachers basically are not familiar with the moving potential which information have, about the lack of understanding of needs which various users can have in comparison to the possession of the information about the institution or implicit non-support of the necessity that the information are given to the public. It is necessary to plan the activities (the training of students and teachers for the mediation of students of same age; seminars for teachers in the area of communication skills; establishing of the mutual cooperation between the experts within the school, etc.). This research needs to be amended by the means of oral interview with examinees which would also enable the evaluation of their character and the strength of their motivation, which is a necessary precondition of the validation of the total research procedure. The important thing is to define who and how will be the decision maker, which requires: precise defining of the preferable management profile; which managers/principals could be considered as successful, and which as unsuccessful in accordance to the experience characteristics, that is Čukanović Karavidić, M, et al., Innovative Management, JWE (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) 107 in accordance to the professional evaluations of their work, in order to implement the innovative management in education. References [1] Bagley, C., Woods, P., Glatter, R. 1996. Educational Management and Administration, Scanning the market, 24(2): 125-138. [2] Birzea, C., Cecchini, M., Harrison, C., Krek, K., Vrkaš-Spajić, V. 2005: Tool for Quality Assurance of Education for Democratic Citizenship in Shools, Franc:UNESCO. [3] Bjekic, D. 2007. Communication Studies – bases of pedagogical and business communication, Faculty of Technical Sciences, Cacak. [4] Cerović Kovac, T., Grahovac, V., Stankovic, D., Vukovic, N., Ignjatovic, S., Scepanović, D., Nikolic, G., Toma, S. 2004. Quality education for everyone- challenges of educational reformation in Serbia, Ministry of education and sport of Republic of Serbia, Belgrade. [5] Capljic, G. 2007. School management- experience from other countries, Economy of Transformation 1/2007, 1(X), p. 105-118. [6] Group of authors 2005. Handbook for self-evaluation and evaluation of school work, Ministry of education and sport of Republic of Serbia, Belgrade. [7] Karavidic, S. 2006. Management of education, Institute for Pedagogy and Andragogy, Belgrade. [8] Masen, P. 2007. Education research and forming of education policy, The legitimacy of policy and research of higher education, Center for education policy and AOM, Belgrade. [9] Torrington, D. 2004. Management of human resources, Data Status, Belgrade. [10] Vilkoks L.D, Kameron T.G., Olt H.F., Ejdžin K.V. 2006. Public relations, Faculty of Economics, Belgrade. [11] Vracar, D. 2007. Strategies of market communication, Faculty of Economics, Belgrade. Inovativni menadžment u obrazovanju kroz korišćenje instrumenata komunikacije A P S T R A K T U radu koji je naslovljen Inovativni mendadžment u obrazovanju kroz korišćenje instrumenata komunikacije dat je pregled postojeće prakse u komunikaciji i mogućih načina njenog boljitka u obrazovnom sistemu, vidjen kroz prizmu globalnih i društvenih promena. Nove strategije u primeni instrumenata 108 Journal of Women's Entrepreneurship and Education (2013, No. 3-4, 88-108) komunikacije bi trebalo da doprinesu lakšem prilagodjavanju obrazovnog sistema promenama koje su rezultat promenjenog načina poslovanja i potreba okruženja za obrazovanjem. Empiričko istraživanje koje je sprovedeno pokazalo je da obrazovne ustanove koriste neki oblik komunikacije, da profesori prepoznaju važnost razmene informacija, ali ujedno da se i ne trude da to iznesu u praksi. KLJUČNE REČI: inovacije, komunikacija, menadžment, organizacione promene Article history: Received: 15 June, 2013 Accepted: 20 September, 2013