随着我国高等教育体制改革的深入，大学拥有越来越多的自主权。大学如何合理有效地运用好自主权，激发办学活力，提高办学水平是高等教育理论界和实践界都共同关注的问题。大学内的学院直接承担大学的人才培养、科学研究和社会服务等职能，是学科和事业单位交叉矩阵的结合点。大学要有活力，首先是学院要有活力，因此如何下放权力以激活学院的活力是关键。同时为避免一抓就死，一放就乱的现象出现，理顺学院治理模式尤为重要。从某种意义上来说，学院治理水平直接影响着一所大学的治理水平。学院组织是个开放系统，学院中出现的问题不都是学院自己的问题，因而需要从更宏观视野和背景的组织视角来研究学院治理模式。 本研究从组织理论研究的视角出发，构建理论模型，将影响学院治理模式的因素分为内部因素和外部因素，内部因素包括组织目标、组织结构、技术、参与者；外部因素(即组织环境)包括制度环境和技术环境。学院治理的核心本质是权力的调整与制衡，因此本研究以学院治理中核心权力的差异为标准对学院治理模式进行分类。 研究选取了Z大学治理模式不同的三所学院作为案例进行研究。通过文本分析和访谈调查，结合理论模型，探究影响学院治理模式的内部因素和外部因素。通过对三所案例学院治理模式的核心决策形式、主要影响因素、利弊等进行了分析，发现Z大学学院治理模式有党政为主导、学术为主导和理事会为主导的三种类型。研究发现，学院治理模式是由学院组织内部因素和外部因素共同作用的结果。学院内部组织目标具有多元或单一的特征、组织结构具有复杂性或相对简单的特征、组织内技术具有学术性或市场性的特征、参与者具有正式或松散的特征。学院外部制度环境中虽然规制性规则具有强制性、规范性规则具有约束性的共性，但各案例学院的规制性规则和规范性规则也存在强弱的差异；制度环境中各学院的文化—认知要求分别具有共同信念、模仿同形或共同行动逻辑的个性，技术环境中资源配置具有充足或贫乏的特征、技术手段具有是否相互依赖的特征。 综上，本研究启示主要有三点：第一，学院治理模式呈现多样性的特征，不存在一种“最佳”的治理模式适合每所学院。第二，以组织目标为引领的组织内部诸因素是影响学院治理模式的根本原因。学院组织结构、技术和参与者在影响学院治理模式的同时，也受组织目标的影响。第三，以制度环境为主导的组织外部因素是影响学院治理模式的重要条件。制度环境要求学院治理模式满足“形式”和“实质”的合法性机制，技术环境要求学院治理模式满足效率机制，制度环境与技术环境正在逐步融合。为了激发学院活力，实现学院发展目标，本研究对学院治理模式提出如下对策建议：第一，国家、社会和学校要努力改善学院的组织环境，推进和支持学院治理从单一走向多元；第二，学院要明确目标，优化学院治理模式；第三，学校和学院还应重视学院文化一认知要求，突出学院组织的知识特性。 关键词：学院治理模式；组织理论；组织环境；组织目标

 Universities have more autonomy as China's higher education system reform has developed in depth.It is a common concern for both the theoretical and practical circles of higher education that the universities use their autonomy rationally and effectively to stimulate the school-running vitality and improve school-running level. As a combination of disciplines and institutions, the schools in the university directly undertake functions,such as personnel training, scientific research and social services. To be dynamic in college, the schools must first be active. So it is crucial for universities to delegate power to activate the vitality of the schools. At the same time, it is especially important to straighten out the governance model of the schools to avoid to bad results due to hold power or delegate power. In a sense, the level of schools governance directly affects the governance level of universities. The school organization is an open system, and the problems that arise in the school are not all about the school itself. Therefore, it is necessary to study the college governance model from a broader perspective of organizational theory and background. This study constructs an theoretical model from the perspective of organizational theory, and divides the factors that influence the governance model of the school into internal factors and external factors. Internal factors include organizational goal, organizational structure, technology, and participant; external factors (that is, organizational environment) include institutional environment and technical environment. The core essence of school governance is to adjust and balance the power. Therefore, this study classifies the governance models of schools based on the differences in core powers in school governance. The study selects three schools with different governance models of Z University as a case study. This study explores the internal and external factors that influence the governance model of the school through text analysis and interview surveys, combined with theoretical model. The study finds that the governance models of schools of Z University has three types: party and government-oriented, academic-oriented and council-oriented by analysing the core decision-making forms, main influencing factors, advantages and disadvantages of the three schools governance models. The study finds that the school governance model is influenced by the internal and external factors of the school organization. The internal organizational objectives of the school are diverse or single; the organizational structure is complex or relatively simple; the technology within the organization is academic or market-oriented; the participants are formal or loose. In the external institutional environment of the school, the regulatory rules and normative rules of each school have strong and weak differences, although all the regulatory rules have mandatory and the normative rules are binding; in the institutional environment, the cultural-cognitive requirements of each college have the characteristics of common belief, imitating homomorphism or common action logic; in the technical environment, resources are allocated adequately or poorly, and technical means are interdependent or dependent. To sum up, there are three main points in the study: First, the school governance model is diversified and there is no “best” governance model suitable for each school. Second, the internal factors with the organization goal as a core are the root causes of the governance model of the school. The organizational structure, technology, and participants of the school which are influenced by organizational goals, influence the governance model of the school. Third, the external factors of the organization led by the institutional environment are important factors that affect the governance model of the school. The institutional environment requires that the school governance model meet the legality mechanism of “form” and “substance”. The technical environment requires that the college governance model meet the efficiency mechanism. The institutional environment and technical environment are gradually integrating. In order to stimulate the vitality and achieve the goals of the school, the study proposes the following countermeasures for the school governance model: First, the state, society and schools need to strive to improve the organizational environment of the school, and promote and support to make the governance of the school from single to diversified. Second, the school must set clear goals and optimize its governance model. Third, university and school should also pay attention to the school culture-cognitive requirements to highlight the knowledge characteristics of the school organization. Keywords: school governance model; organizational theory; organizational environment; organizational objective