Abstract
In this conceptual contribution to the study of university governance the authors will approach potential patterns of behavior of key decision-makers at central university level, i.e. roles of governance actors, as well as the set of factors that shape and constrain the governance actor’s room of manoevre and provide avenues to explain varying role enactments through an actor analysis of members of the newly introduced university boards. In a first part the introduction and empowerment of university boards in European higher education institutions is described as a building block of the transformation of university governance. In the second part the main hypothesis derived is that, in governance practice, board members enact roles which are not only shaped and constrained by formal institutions, as given by the organizational context and regulatory structure, but also by conformable, appropriate and legitimate role expectations of central role senders. As a showcase analysis, the roles of university board members are conceptually explored. Especially in the context of recent reform processes, board members who tend to have a varied status set, very often find themselves in a troubling situation of conflicting role expectations, leading to high levels of role conflicts and role ambiguity. It is the aim of this paper to sketch and examine the factors that contribute to the different roles university board members may take.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
E.g. in North-Rhine-Westfalia and Baden-Württemberg.
Pearce and Zahra (1991 as quoted in Pettigrew 1992) suggest that boards through their external members acting in the interest of the organization provide business contacts and thus contribute to the overall performance of the company. From the perspective of shareholders, boards are regarded as necessary to ensure the protection of shareholder interest.
One of the exceptions are Austrian university boards (De Boer et al. 2010).
An analogous empirical study is currently being conducted by the authors to provide for empirical results.
There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, e.g. U.K. universities.
References
Adams, R., Hermalin, B. E., & Weisbach, M. S. (2008). The Role of Boards of Directors in Corporate Governance: A conceptual framework and survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 48(1), 59–108.
Amaral, A. (2008). Transforming higher education. In A. Amaral, et al. (Eds.), From governance to identity. A Festschrift for Mary Henkel (pp. 81–94). Dordrecht: Springer.
Amaral, A., Jones, G. A., & Karseth, B. (Eds.). (2002). Governing higher education: National perspectives on institutional governance. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Beasley, M. S. (1996). An empirical analysis of the relation between the board of director composition and financial statement fraud. The Accounting Review, 71(4), 443–465.
Bleiklie, I. (1994). The new public management and the pursuit of knowledge. Notat 9411. Bergen: LOS.
Bogumil, J., Heinze, R. G., Grohs, S., & Gerber, S. (2007). Hochschulräte als neues Steuerungsinstrument? Eine empirische Analyse der Mitglieder und Aufgabenbereiche. Düsseldorf: Hans-Böckler Stiftung.
Bogumil, J., & Schmid, J. (2001). Politik in Organisationen. Organisationstheoretische Ansätze und praxisbezogene Anwendungsbeispiele. Opladen: Leske & Budrich.
Bradshaw, P., Murray, V., & Wolpin, J. (1992). Do nonprofit boards make a difference? An exploration of the relationships among board structure, process, and effectiveness. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 21(3), 227–249.
Brunsson, N., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2000). Constructing organizations: The example of public sector reform. Organization Studies, 24(4), 721–724.
Burgi, M., & Gräf, I. (2010). Das (Verwaltungs-)organisationsrecht der Hochschulen im Spiegel der neueren Gesetzgebung und Verfassungsrechtsprechung. Deutsches Verwaltungsblatt, 125(18), 1125–1134.
Cadbury, A. (1990). The Company Director. London.
Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Cornforth, C. (Ed.). (2003). The governance of public and non-profit organizations: What do boards do? Routledge studies in the management of voluntary and non-profit organizations. London: Routledge.
De Boer, H. F., Enders, J., & Leisyte, L. (2007a). Public sector reform in Dutch higher education: The organizational transformation of the university. Public Administration, 85(1), 27–46.
De Boer, H. F., Enders, J., & Schimank, U. (2007b). On the way towards new public management? The governance of university systems in England, the Netherlands, Austria and Germany. In D. Jansen (Ed.), New forms of governance in research organizations. Disciplinary approaches, interfaces and integration (pp. 137–152). Dordrecht: Springer.
De Boer, H. F., & File, J. (2009). Higher education governance reforms across Europe (MODERN project). Brussels: ESMU.
De Boer, H. F., Huisman, J., & Meister-Scheytt, S. (2010). Supervision in ‘modern’ university governance: Boards under Scrutiny. Studies in Higher Education, 35(3), 317–333.
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.
Dragsic, Z., Kretek, P. M., & Kehm, B. M. (2011). University boards: Formal authority and accountability in five countries. Paper presented at 33rd Annual EAIR Forum, Warsaw 2011.
Estermann, T., & Nokkala, T. (2009). University autonomy in Europe I. Brussels: Exploratory study.
Fama, E. F. (1980). Agency problem and the theory of the firm. Journal of Political Economy, 88, 288–308.
Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Separation of ownership and control. Journal of Law and Economics, 26(June), 301–325.
Ferlie, E., Musselin, C., & Andresani, G. (2008). The steering of higher education systems: A public management perspective. Higher Education, 56(3), 325–348.
Green, J. C., & Griesinger, D. W. (1996). Board performance and organizational effectiveness in nonprofit social services organizations. Non-profit Management and Leadership, 6(4), 381–402.
Herman, R. D., & Renz, D. O. (1998). Nonprofit organizational effectiveness: Contrasts between especially effective and less effective organizations. Non-profit Management and Leadership, 9(1), 23–38.
Hüther, O. (2009). Hochschulräte als Steuerungsinstrument. Beiträge für Hochschulforschung, 31(2), 50–73.
Hüther, O. (2010). Von der Kollegialität zur Hierarchie? Eine Analyse des New Managerialism in den Landeshochschulgesetzen. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Jackson, D. K., & Holland, T. P. (1998). Measuring the effectiveness of nonprofit boards. Non-profit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 27(2), 159–182.
Kahn, R. L., Wolfe, D. M., Quinn, P. R., Snoak, J. D., & Rosenthal, R. A. (1964). Organization stress: Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: Wiley.
Kehm, B. M., & Lanzendorf, U. (Eds.). (2006). Reforming university governance. Changing conditions for research in four European countries. Bonn: Lemmens.
Kogan, M., Bauer, M., Bleiklie, I., & Henkel, M. (2000). Transforming higher education. A comparative study. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Krücken, G. (2003). Learning the ‘new, new thing’: On the role of path dependency in university structures. Higher Education, 46(3), 315–339.
Krücken, G., & Meier, F. (2006). Turning the university into an organizational actor. In G. Drori, J. Meyer, & H. Hwang (Eds.), Globalization and organization (pp. 241–257). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Marshall, S., & Rytmeister, C. R. (2007). Studying political tensions in university governance: A focus on board member constructions of role. Tertiary Education and Management, 13(4), 281–294.
Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.
Meier, F. (2009). Die Universität als Akteur. Zum institutionellen Wandel der Hochschulorganisation. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Merton, R. K. (1957). The role-set: Problems in sociological theory. The British Journal of Sociology, 8(2), 106–120.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.
Meyer-Guckel, V., Winde, M., & Ziegele, F. (Eds.). (2010). Handbuch Hochschulräte. Denkanstöße und Erfolgsfaktoren für die Praxis. In Zusammenarbeit mit CHE, Stifterverband der Deutschen Wissenschaft. Essen: Heinz-Nixdorf-Stiftung.
Musselin, C. (2006). Are universities specific organisations? In G. Krücken, A. Kosmützky, & M. Torka (Eds.), Towards a multidiversity, universities between national traditions and global trends and national traditions (pp. 63–84). Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.
Neave, G. (1994). On looking both ways at once: Scrutinies of the private life of higher education. In P. A. M. Maasen & F. A. Van Vught (Eds.), Inside Academia. New challenges for the academic profession. Utrecht: CHEPS.
Nienhüser, W. (2011). Ressourcenabhängigkeit und Hochschulräte. Eine empirische Analyse. In: Hochschulwesen, 59. Jg., H. 6, S. 199–204.
Nienhüser, W. (2012). Academic Capitalism? - Wirtschaftsvertreter in Hochschulräten deutscher Universitäten. Eine organisationstheoretisch fundierte empirische Analyse. In: U. Wilkesmann & C. Schmid (Hg.), (pp. 89–112). Wiesbaden: Hochschule als Organisation.
OECD. (2003). Changing Patterns of Governance in Higher Education. In Education policy analysis, Chapter 3. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/0/20/35747684.pdf. Accessed 20 January 2010.
Paradeise, C., Reale, E., Bleiklie, I., & Ferlie, E. (Eds.). (2009). University governance: Western European comparative perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer.
Pearce, J. A., II & Zahra, S. A. (1991). The relative power of CEOs and boards of directors: Associations with corporate performance. Strategic Management Journal, 12(2), 135–153.
Pettigrew, A. M. (1992). On studying managerial elites. Strategic Management Journal 13, Special Issue: Fundamental Themes in Strategy Process Research, 163–182.
Rytmeister, C. R. (2007a). Working together in governance? The construction of common purpose amongst university governing body members. Paper presented at the Australasian Association for Institutional Research 2007 Forum.
Rytmeister, C. R. (2007b). Governing university strategy: Perceptions and practice of governance and management roles. Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the European Association for Institutional Research (EAIR), Innsbruck, 26–29 August 2007.
Scott, P. (1996). University governance and management: An analysis of the system and institutional level changes in Western Europe. In P. A. M. Maasen & F. A. Van Vught (Eds.), Inside Academia. New challenges for the academic profession. Utrecht: Cheps.
Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1–19.
Wiswede, G. (1977). Rollentheorie. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.
Acknowledgments
This paper has been developed within the EUROHESC framework in the Collaborative Research Project: “Transforming Universities in Europe” (TRUE). We are grateful to the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) and the European Science Foundation (ESF) for their support. We would also like to thank our project partners, the editors of the special issue and the reviewers for their critical assessments of our drafts. Finally, we extend our gratitude to Ms. Yemisrach Negash and Ms. Katharina Stenzel for their outstanding support in the preparation of this paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kretek, P.M., Dragšić, Ž. & Kehm, B.M. Transformation of university governance: on the role of university board members. High Educ 65, 39–58 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9580-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9580-x