Centralization

Purpose: The aim of tis research was presenting model of rotation from centralization to reducing of focus on the field of formality and power in decision-making of staff levels in education of Tehran. Methodology: Present research in terms of purpose was applied and in terms of implementation was quantitative. The study population was the principals and employees of the staff level of education ministry and the principals and teachers of secondary high schools of Tehran city in the academic years of 2018-19, which based on Cochran's formula from them, were selected 440 people by simple random and multi-stage cluster sampling methods. To collect data was used from 37-items researcher-made questionnaire that its content validity was confirmed by experts and the structure validity of instrument was confirmed by factor analysis and its reliability was calculated 0.94 by Cronbach's alpha method. Data were analyzed with exploratory factor analysis and structural equation modeling methods in SPSS and AMOS software. Findings: The findings showed that the model of rotation from centralization to reducing of focus on the field of formality and power in decision-making had six components of formality, power in decision-making, horizontal communication, delegation of authority, information technology and school-based. Also, the mentioned model had a good fit and all six components of formality, power in decision-making, horizontal communication, delegation of authority, information technology and school-based had a significant direct effect on the rotation from centralization to reducing of focus (P<0.05). Conclusion: Regarded to the results of the present study through improving the components of formality, power in decision-making, horizontal communication, delegation of authority, information technology and school-based can be achieved from centralization to reducing of focus on the field of formality and power in decision-making.

The questions of centralization and decentralization arise in every polity. The constitution or the practice or both have to settle how much of policy making is to be decided by the central government and by component bodies. By and large liberalism and decentralization tend to go together while authoritarianism tends to be associated with centralization. The constitutional model which is generally regarded as bringing about the largest amount or decentralization is federalism. This is said to sonstitute a half way house between confederacies (where component units dominate)and unitary states (where the center dominates) In its classical form at least , federalism stipulates that there have to be two independent levels of government (the centre and upper level component bodies (often named states) each of these levels has the right to decide on matters falling within its own sphere. There are difficulties in practice especially with respect to the constituent power and to the fields allocated to each level. Federalism must be based on a rigid constitution there has to be s supreme court protecting the independence of the two levels of government there has to be a second chamber defending the rights of the component bodies at the central level.yet there are variations in the extent to which the component bodies are protected and generally in the extent to which there is decentralization. On the one hand federal states are becoming more centralized on the other centralization cannot go beyond a given point without leading to gross inefficiency and perhaps to a break up of the regime as the communist experience showed. Partly for this reason there is a degree of convergence between federal and unitary states. Federalism is also associated with efforts to bring together independent states but this has occurred in a smell number of polities only. Attempts at achieving closer cooperation between states has led more commonly to confederacies, such as the Unites Nations. The European community or European :::union::: has innovated by forming a type of association labeled supranational which is intermediate between the confederal and the federal models. There is innovation in that developments take place gradually with new fields beings progressively covered new structures being set up and new member states joining. The problems of centralization and decentralization have exercised the minds of many in relation to many types of organization : both efficency and freedom appear to be at stake . federalism succeeded in a number of contexts but it is not the panacea which some suggest it is it is also so diverse that one has to refer to federalisms rather than to federalism . what is at stake is the need to find an equilibrium between the two extremes of over centralization and break up. Given the large number of situations in the contemporary world one should look for a variety of solutions and for a continuous evolution of the models which have hitherto been proposed.