CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
‘‘In view of the central nature of staff relationship, and the almost universal assumption that institution benefits management staff, and the importance of scholarship, it is perhaps surprising how relatively few institution have specific policies in place to either monitor or to develop and maximize these  beneficial synergies’’, (J.M consulting 200, p.16).
Academic leaders and managers need to understand the conditions likely to facilitate links between management staff of an institution and the relationship existing within them (member of staff) and those that inhibit connections and seek to compartmentalize academic activities (Locke, 2004, pp. 108)
This publication seeks to support institutional policy- makers to enable their institutions to maintain a cordial relationship between the members of staff and discipline – based scholarship more effectively. The focus however, is on supporting the relationships between staff and the inter-relationship among member of staff a higher institution of learning with respect to policies and practices.
In terms of the work of the higher education academy, we seek to support its strategic aim of working with institutions in their strategies for improving the students learning experience’’ (higher education and academy, 2005a.) and to ensure that the advice is based on research evidence. Ultimately, the central issue that national system and institution hade decide is ‘’what is distinctive about higher education?’’ however, what is distinctive about higher education is supporting student and the wider society understanding of the complexities of the worlds in which we live
Although, for many staff, their motivations and the sense of their role is highly shaped by both their own appreciation of, and belief I the value of relationship to other member wider society. While there is evidently much practice in realizing these values we also have to recognize that it is unevenly distributed, much is implicit and many institutional policies in this area are poorly developed and sometimes work against nexus.
In the long run, more recent research demonstrates the potential value of staff relationship to student learning and for motivating student to learn. This research also how that the linkage is not automatic, and has to be built systematically into the curriculum, department institutional and national planning questioning the value or possibility of the link also stems from the realities of mass higher education. Thus, the linkage might once have been readily assumed or delivered with small classes, selective student entry, and staff with time to teach and relate effectively clearly, if that golden age ever existed, it has now gone.
Paul Ramsden (2001), then pro-vices- chancellor (learning and teaching) at the university of Sydney and now chief executive of the higher education academy, expressed this works perspective when her stated ‘’the main hope for relating a genuinely student-centered undergraduate education lies in re-engineering the enter academic institution of higher learning. The word ‘engineer’ suggests that the link does not occur automatically; it has to be designed; ‘created’; constructed; and brought about. The word ‘reengineer’ suggest that even if once the linkage did exist, it now needs significant ‘re-inventing’ to ensure it is in place or, even better, that it is embedded in many places and processes. Therefore, there is much that individual, course teams, department and national systems can and should do to forge these links (Jenkins et al, 2003).