Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Designing the Entrepreneurial University: The Interpretation of a Global Idea

  • Published:
Public Organization Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Becoming an entrepreneurial university has been identified as the solution to the problems facing contemporary higher education systems. The idea of becoming an entrepreneurial university can be seen as the result of a more globalised higher education sector where the domestic and institution-specific characteristics of universities are downplayed in favour of a more uniform idea of what a university should do and how it should be organized. This article contributes to this scholarly discussion by analysing how efforts to transform universities into “more complete organisations” are understood and interpreted in terms of organisational structures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In 2012, AU ranked 86th globally, in the prestigious world university rankings prepared by Shanghai’s Jiao Tang university. Domestically, AU has consistently ranked number 2, after the University of Copenhagen, the country’s flagship institution.

References

  • Aagaard, K. (2011). Danish University mergers: the case of Aarhus University. Paper presented at the Hedda 10th anniversary conference. Oslo, 4th November.

  • Aagaard, K., & Mejlgaard, K. (Eds.) (2012). Dansk forskningspolitik efter årtusindskiftet. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag.

  • Aarrevaara, T., Dobson, I., & Elander, C. (2009). Brave new world: higher education reform in Finland. Higher Education Management and Policy, 21(2), 2–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, H., & Herker, D. (1977). Boundary spanning roles and organization structure. The Academy of Management Review, 2(2), 217–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • AU (2008). Strategy 2008-2012: quality and diversity. Aarhus: University of Aarhus.

  • Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: intellectual enquiry and the culture of disciplines. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beerkens, E. (2010). Global models for the national research university: adoption and adaptation in Indonesia and Malaysia. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 8(3), 369–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-David, J. (1992). Centers of learning. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Publ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitz, J., & Feldman, M. (2008). Academic entrepreneurs: organizational change at the individual level. Organization Science, 19(1), 69–89. doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bercovitz, J., Feldman, M., Feller, I., & Burton, R. (2001). Organizational structure as a determinant of academic patent and licensing behavior: an exploratory study of Duke, Johns Hopkins, and Pennsylvania State Universities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26(1–2), 21–35. doi:10.1023/a:1007828026904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birnbaum, R. (1988). How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. University of Michigan: Jossey-Bass.

  • Brignall, S., & Modell, S. (2000). An institutional perspective on performance measurement and management in the ‘new public sector’. Management Accounting Research, 11(3), 281–306. doi:10.1006/mare.2000.0136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (Eds.) (2011). The Ashgate research companion to new public management. Surrey: Ashgate.

  • Clark, B. R. (1983). The higher education system: academic organization in cross-national perspective. Los Angeles, California: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. R. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: organizational pathways of transformation. New York: Pergamon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Czarniawska-Joerges, B., & Sevón, G. (2005). Global ideas: how ideas, objects and practices travel in a global economy. Copenhagen: Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Boer, H., & Stensaker, B. (2007). An internal representative system: the democratic vision. In P. Maassen, & J. P. Olsen (Eds.), University dynamics and European integration (Vol. 19, pp. 99–118, Higher Education Dynamics). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

  • De Dreu, C. K. W., Harinck, F., & Van Vianen, A. E. M. (1999). Conflict and performance in groups and organizations. In C. Cooper & I. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 14, pp. 369–414). New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Debackere, K. (2000). Managing academic R&D as a business at K.U. Leuven: context, structure and process. R&D Management, 30(4), 323–328. doi:10.1111/1467-9310.00186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drori, I., & Honig, B. (2013). A process model of internal and external legitimacy. Organization Studies, 34(3), 345–376. doi:10.1177/0170840612467153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., & Webster, A. (1998). Entrepreneurial science: the second academic revolution. In E. Etzkowitz, A. Webster, & P. Healey (Eds.), Capitalizing knowledge: new intersections of industry and academia (pp. 21–46). Albany: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., Ranga, M., Benner, M., Guaranys, L., Maculan, A. M., & Kneller, R. (2008). Pathways to the entrepreneurial university: towards a global convergence. Science and Public Policy, 35(9), 681–695. doi:10.3152/030234208x389701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farazmand, A. (1999). Globalization and public administration. Public Administration Review, 59(6), 509–522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farazmand, A. (2002). Modern organizations: theory and practice. Westport, Conn: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, R. C., & Randolph, W. A. (1992). Cross-functional structures: a review and integration of matrix organization and project management. Journal of Management, 18(2), 267–294. doi:10.1177/014920639201800204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frølich, N. (2005). Implementation of new public management in Norwegian Universities. European Journal of Education, 40(2), 223–234. doi:10.1111/j.1465-3435.2005.00221.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fumasoli, T., Pinheiro, R., Stensaker, B. (2012). Strategy and identity formation in Norwegian and Swiss universities. Paper presented at the CHER conference, September 10–12 Belgrade.

  • Galbraith, J. R. (1971). Matrix organization designs: how to combine functional and project forms. Business Horizons, 14(1), 29–40. doi:10.1016/0007-6813(71)90037-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing complex organizations. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. R. (2008). Designing matrix organizations that actually work: how IBM, Proctor & Gamble and others design for success. San Francisco: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, M., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gornitzka, Å., & Larsen, I. M. (2004). Towards professionalisation? Restructuring of administrative work force in universities. Higher Education, 47(4), 455–471. doi:10.1023/B:HIGH.0000020870.06667.f1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gornitzka, Å., Kyvik, S., & Larsen, I. M. (1998). The bureaucratisation of universities. Minerva, 36(1), 21–47. doi:10.1023/a:1004382403543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gornitzka, Å., Stensaker, B., Smeby, J.-C., & De Boer, H. (2004). Contract arrangements in the Nordic countries: solving the efficiency-effectiveness dilemma? Higher Education in Europe, 29, 87–101. doi:10.1080/03797720410001673319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. (1988). Organizational design types, tracks and the dynamics of strategic change. Organization Studies, 9(3), 293–316. doi:10.1177/017084068800900301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. (1993). Understanding strategic change: the contribution of archetypes. Academy of Management Journal, 36(5), 1052–1081.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011). Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 317–371. doi:10.1080/19416520.2011.590299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatakenaka, S., & Thompson, Q. (2010). Aarhus University: reform review: Final Report. Arhus.

  • Hay, C., & Wincott, D. (1998). Structure, agency and historical institutionalism. Political Studies, 46(5), 951–957.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holm-Nielsen, L. B. (2012). Mergers in higher education: University reforms in Denmark–the case of Aarhus university. Presentation at the seminar “University Mergers: European Experiences”, Lisbon.

  • Jongbloed, B., Enders, J., & Salerno, C. (2008). Higher education and its communities: interconnections, interdependencies and a research agenda. Higher Education, 56(3), 303–324. doi:10.1007/s10734-008-9128-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, W. F. (1986). Matrix organization: a social experiment. The Academy of Management Journal, 29(3), 536–561. doi:10.2307/256223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kehm, B. M., & Stensaker, B. (2009). University rankings, diversity, and the new landscape of higher education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, C. (2001). The uses of the university. Massachusets: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krücken, G. (2003). Learning the ‘New, New Thing’: on the role of path dependency in university structures. Higher Education, 46(3), 315–339. doi:10.1023/a:1025344413682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krücken, G., & Meier, F. (2006). Turning the university into an organizational actor. In G. S. Drori, J. W. Meyer, & H. Hwang (Eds.), Globalization and organization: world society and organizational change (pp. 241–257). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuprenas, J. A. (2003). Implementation and performance of a matrix organization structure. International Journal of Project Management, 21(1), 51–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leihy, P., & Salazar, J. (2012). Institutional, regional and market identity in Chilean public regional universities. In R. Pinheiro, P. Benneworth, & G. A. Jones (Eds.), Universities and regional development: a critical assessment of tensions and contradictions (pp. 141–160). Milton Park and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maassen, P. (2009). The modernisation of European higher education. In A. Amaral, I. Bleiklie, C. Musselin (Eds.), From governance to identity (Vol. 24, pp. 95–112, Higher Education Dynamics). Springer Netherlands.

  • Maassen, P., & Olsen, J. P. (Eds.). (2007). University dynamics and European integration. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maassen, P., & Stensaker, B. (2011). The knowledge triangle, European higher education policy logics and policy implications. Higher Education, 61(6), 757–769. doi:10.1007/s10734-010-9360-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, B. R. (2012). Are universities and university research under threat? Towards an evolutionary model of university speciation. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 36(3), 543–565. doi:10.1093/cje/bes006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations: a synthesis of the research. Harlow: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohrman, K., Ma, W., & Baker, D. (2008). The research university in transition: the emerging global model. Higher Education Policy, 21(1), 5–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, S. S., & Snell, S. A. (2007). Relational archetypes, organizational learning, and value creation: extending the human resource architecture. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 236–256. doi:10.5465/amr.2007.23464060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musselin, C. (2007). Are universities specific organisations? In G. Krücken, A. Kosmützky, & M. Torka (Eds.), Towards a multiversity? Universities between global trends and national traditions (pp. 63–84). Bielefeld: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (2003). The external control of organizations: a resource dependence perspective. Stanford, California: Stanford Business Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro, R. (2012a). The future of the (entrepreneurial) university: Resolving or propelling the tensions between the regional and the global? Paper presented at CHER 2012 conference, Belgrade Sept. 10–12.

  • Pinheiro, R. (2012b). In the region, for the region? A comparative study of the institutionalisation of the regional mission of universities. Oslo: University of Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro, R. (2012c). University ambiguity and institutionalization: a tale of three regions. In R. Pinheiro, P. Benneworth, & G. A. Jones (Eds.), Universities and regional development: A critical assessment of tensions and contradictions (pp. 35–55). Milton Park and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinheiro, R., Benneworth, P., & Jones, G. A. (Eds.). (2012). Universities and regional development: a critical assessment of tensions and contradictions. Milton Park and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W., & Colyvas, J. (2008). Microfoundations of institutional theory. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 276–298). London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Powell, W. W., & DiMaggio, P. (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramirez, F. O. (2010). Accounting for excellence: transforming universities into organizational actors. In V. Rust, L. Portnoi, & S. Bagely (Eds.), Higher education, policy, and the global competition phenomenon (pp. 43–58). Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rip, A. (2004). Strategic research, post-modern universities and research training. Higher Education Policy, 17(2), 153–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothblatt, S., & Wittrock, B. (1993). The European and American university since 1800: historical and sociological essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rowlinson, S. (2001). Matrix organizational structure, culture and commitment: a Hong Kong public sector case study of change. Construction Management and Economics, 19(7), 669–673. doi:10.1080/01446190110066137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salminen, A. (2003). New public management and Finnish public sector organisations: the case of universities. In A. Amaral, V. L. Meek, & I. M. Larsen (Eds.), The higher education managerial revolution? (pp. 55–75). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sbragia, R. (1984). Clarity of manager roles and performance of R&D multidisciplinary projects in matrix structures. R&D Management, 14(2), 113–126. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.1984.tb01150.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartzman, S. (Ed.). (2008). University and development in Latin America: successful experiences of research centers (Global Perspectives in Higher Education). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

  • Scott, W. R. (2008a). Institutions and organizations: ideas and interests. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (2008b). Approaching adulthood: the maturing of institutional theory. Theory and Society, 37(5), 427–442. doi:10.1007/s11186-008-9067-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1966). TVA and the grass roots : a study in the sociology of formal organization. New York, N.Y.: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore, N.J.: Johns Hopkins University Press.

  • Stensaker, B., & Harvey, L. (2011). Accountability in higher education: global perspectives on trust and power. New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapper, T., & Palfreyman, D. (2011). Oxford, the Collegiate University: conflict, consensus and continuity. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vorley, T., & Nelles, J. (2012). Scaling entrepreneurial architecture: the challenge of managing regional technology transfer in Hamburg. In R. Pinheiro, P. Benneworth, & G. A. Jones (Eds.), Universities and regional development: a critical assessment of tensions and contradictions (pp. 181–198). Milton Park and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vukasovic, M., Maassen, P., Nerland, M., Pinheiro, R., Stensaker, B., & Vabø, A. (2012). Effects of higher education reforms: change dynamics. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Welch, A. R. (2005). The professoriate: profile of a profession. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, R. (2008). Constructing universities as strategic actors: limitations and variations. In L. Engwall & D. Weaire (Eds.), The university in the market (pp. 23–37). London: Portland Press Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Dr. Kaare Aagaard and two anonymous reviewers for their contribution and insightful comments on an earlier version of the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Agderforskning, Gimlemoen 19, 4630, Kristiansand S, Norway

    Rómulo Pinheiro

  2. University of Oslo, P.O.Box 1092, Blindern, 0317, Oslo, Norway

    Bjørn Stensaker

Authors
  1. Rómulo Pinheiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bjørn Stensaker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rómulo Pinheiro.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pinheiro, R., Stensaker, B. Designing the Entrepreneurial University: The Interpretation of a Global Idea. Public Organiz Rev 14, 497–516 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-013-0241-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-013-0241-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation