What Kind of Management Suits Science Best?

1998

This study examined the character of the emerging systems of corporate management in Australian universities and their effects on academic and administrative practices, focusing on relations of power. Case studies were conducted at 17 individual universities of various types. In each institution, interviews were conducted with senior managers/leaders, middle-level academic managers (faculty deans), and a range of other personnel. The study shows that the Australian government has led the change to a performance-based competitive system with a single, standardized system of funding, funds distribution, and measuremenc of research activity. Study findings are organized under five broad headings: (1) the emergence of a new kind of strategic leader; (2) the eclipse of collegial systems of decision making and the rise of management-controlled "post-collegial" mechanisms for decision making and consultation; (3) changes in research management, with consequent effects on academic work; (4) commonalities and variations in the different New Universities; and (5) changes in universities in the context of developments in public management. Overall, the study found more corporate-style university managements emerging in all institutions. It is concluded that the new research system is creating perverse incentives in academic terms such as the primacy of money income for research over research activities and outputs, the primacy of research quantity over quality, and the tendency to "flatten out" distinctions among the disciplines for administrative purposes. (Contains 13 references.) (DB)

Australian Universities Review, 2012

The changing character of universities in recent decades, both in Australia and internationally, has been the subject of considerable discussion, debate and indeed, concern.

2007

How to Lead Academic Departments Successfully, 2021

The role of management in universities has become more complex over the last decades because of changes in legislation, the economy, student intake, the introduction of new performance indicators for research quality, relevance and output, etc. (de Boer and Goedegebuure 2009). According to Pulkkinen and colleagues (2019), Nordic universities are going through a ‘rationalisation’, with the ‘introduction of a more formal structure in terms of a stronger emphasis on quality assurance, evaluation, accountability measures and incentive systems’ (Pulkkinen et al. 2019, p. 4). The EU’s modernisation agendas from 2006 and 2011 and the Bologna process of making the policies of higher education more similar have had strong effects on Nordic universities (Pulkkinen et al. 2019, p. 5). For instance, the role of university management and deanship has changed, giving deans ‘substantial managerial powers’ (de Boer, Enders and Leisyte 2007, p. 39). Today, the power of top management is linked to a more hierarchical organisational structure, in which deans and the central executive board have frequent meetings, predefining the main direction for the university, before engaging the remaining faculty. The chapter discusses three key issues: First, by presenting a discussion of how a number of dilemmas of management relate to key conditional factors of Danish universities (e.g., law, management structure, economy, student intake). Second, by offering a discussion on the strategy of the Copenhagen Business School (CBS) that aim at strengthening the quality of research by expanding the amount of external funding and implementing key performance indicators. Third, by giving a discussion of the pros and cons of implementing key performance indicators to measure research quality. The advantage of a performance-based university is that the criteria used for measuring the performance of researchers are transparent. Consequently, the power of management is reduced, and the power of scholars is increased. Visible performance indicators make it clear to all – including scholars – what it takes to be promoted or hired at a particular department and to be awarded a bonus. In relation to gender, research shows how ‘the new managerialism’ – quantifiable tools, and so on – may have a gendered bias such that female scholars’ performance is evaluated lower than their male colleagues (Steinþórsdóttir et al. 2019). However, a key point in gender studies is that when a performance measurement system is transparent, then an opaque (male-dominated) culture is easier to combat. Performance indicators are one way of doing away with nepotism and the documented ‘Huey, Dewey and Louie effect’. In addition to this, research has found that performance-based systems lead to more production in all areas. There are also disadvantages to the quantifiable performance indicators used in today’s universities. They cannot stand alone, as management decisions must be context sensitive. There are many ways of gaming the system, for instance, groups of researchers that are joint authors on all their individual publications, research groups that decide to cite each other whether it is relevant or not, research managers that demand to be coauthor on all of their junior scholars’ work, and so on. Moreover, as shown in the cited literature, performance indicators favour particular disciplines. For instance, in relation to the AJG performance indicator, this tool favours articles over books and monodisciplinary work over interdisciplinary work, as well as multiauthor productions and publications in the English language when evaluating which journals are rated 4 or 4*. Despite the best intentions, performance indicators may also suppress research agendas that are based on a scientific approach that falls outside the more classical approaches of top journals. Throughout the chapter, I alternate between drawing on my insights from my position as the vice dean of research at the CBS and drawing from the academic work of my national and international colleagues on university management.

2010

Ruch Filozoficzny

Historically, universities not only played an educational and research role, but also created culture. It was also expressed by the academic ethos. At the same time, along with the advancement of the globalisation of economic processes, there is a tendency to apply the market approach in their case, which results in the economisation and financialisation of science. The clash of these two worlds, i.e. the academic ethos embedded in academic values ​​and the economic approach to the functions of universities, is manifested, for example, in their McDonaldisation. As a consequence, universities focus on those aspects of their activities that are economically effective, including, for example, providing specialised educational services for student – clients. This process may result in universities losing their character, and thus becoming centres of creative inspiration and scientific discourse between scientists. Therefore, the aim of this study is to try to answer the following rese...

The Review of Higher Education

Research that occurs in universities under conditions of patronage is distinguished from research that occurs under less distorted market conditions. It is claimed that academic research is shifting from an area of patronage consumption to one of economic development investmen. In addition to considering the markets for academic research and research and development funding under conditions of patronage, implications for economic development policy are considered. Markets for research in universities under conditions of patronage have special features: patronage commonly occurs under conditions of oligopsony, where research is sponsored by a relatively small number of federal agencies, the largest foundations, and top industrial supporters; patronage implies unequal bargaining power; the patron gains indirect consumption benefits, some of which are based on exclusion; and consumption as opposed to investment is a key element of patronage. Some universities wish to decrease their dependence on federal support and are attempting to broaden their revenue base by a move toward state or regional economic development. The life sciences are used as an example of the problem of "misspecialization" of research that can create "blockages" as it flows into the economy, generating low economic growth. (SW)

1970

Minerva, 2007

For academic administrators, the management of research remains a matter more of hope than expectation. It has proved particularly difficult to measure quality. Managers typically view research as an ÔassetÕ. This essay argues that it is more useful to view research and its management as ÔprocessÕ, and explores the implications of doing so for managers and researchers alike.

CBS Wire, 2021

The marketization of the university is reflected in the demand that universities constantly competeon the international market for publications, research funding, scientific labour and students. Today, university researchers have thus become ‘entrepreneurs’ whose most important task is to produce bibliometrically competitive knowledge, generate external funding and offer programmes centred on maximizing candidates ‘employability’. Researchers are increasingly measured and promoted based on their ‘performance’ and ‘innovation’ in these areas rather than their academic skills and knowledge. Research freedom includes not being forced to conduct research aimed at specific journals, selected by politicians or the university management based on bibliometric rankings; a selection that is often a far cry from individual researchers’ and research groups’ academic specialist expertise.