Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The differentiation of the strategic profile of higher education institutions. New positioning indicators based on microdata

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We address the issue of differentiation of the profile of universities and offer a set of new indicators based on microdata at the individual level and the application of robust nonparametric efficiency measures.

In particular, we use efficiency measures in order to characterize the way in which universities use their inputs (academic and non academic staff, funding) in the effort to position themselves in the space of output (undergraduate teaching, postgraduate education, fundamental research, contract research, third mission), while keeping efficiency under control.

The strategic problem of universities is defined as making best use of existing resources in the short run, while enlarging the scope of autonomy in procuring additional resources in the long run. In order to make best use of resources universities are led to increase their specialization and differentiate their offering profile. This happens even if the European institutional landscape does not encourage universities to differentiate.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amaral, A., Jones, G. A., Karseth, B. (Eds) (2002), Governing Higher Education: National Perspectives on Institutional Governance. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barré, R. (2006), Towards a European STI Indicators Platform (ESTIP), Position Paper presented at the second PRIME annual conference, Paris, February 2006.

  • Bonaccorsi, A. (2007), Explaining poor performance of European science: Institutions versus policies, Science and Public Policy, 34(5): 303–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C. (2004), Econometric approaches to the analysis of productivity of R&D systems. Production functions and production frontiers, In: H. F. Moed, W. Glänzel, U. Schmoch (Eds), Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 51–74.

  • Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C. (Eds) (2007a), Universities and Strategic Knowledge Creation. Specialisation and Performance in Europe, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C. (2007b), Theoretical perspectives on university strategy, In: Bonaccorsi & Daraio (2007a).

  • Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C. (2007c), Universities as strategic knowledge creators: Some empirical evidence, In: [Bonaccorsi & Daraio, 2007a].

  • Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C., Lepori, B., Slipersaeter, S. (2007d), Indicators on individual higher education institutions: Addressing data problems and comparability issues, Research Evaluation, 16(2): 66–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C., Simar., L. (2006), Size, scope and trade-off in the productivity of universities: an application of robust nonparametric methods to Italian data. Scientometrics, 66(2): 389–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C., Simar, L. (2007), Productivity and efficiency of European universities. Exploring trade-offs in the strategic profile, In: [Bonaccorsi & Daraio, 2007a].

  • Cazals, C., Florens, J.P., Simar, L. (2002), Nonparametric frontier estimation: a robust approach, Journal of Econometrics, 106: 1–25.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. R. (1983), The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspective. Berkeley, The University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crespi, G. (2007), The UK knowledge production function, In: [Bonaccorsi & Daraio, 2007a].

  • D’Angelo, C. A., Pugini, F., Abramo, G. (2006), La misurazione della produttività scientifica delle università italiane attraverso una metodologia bibliometrica-non parametrica, In: Reti, servizi e competitività delle imprese, XVII Riunione Scientifica AiIG, Aracne Roma.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daraio, C., Simar, L. (2005), Introducing environmental variables in nonparametric frontier models: A probabilistic approach, Journal of Productivity Analysis, 24(1): 93–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daraio, C., Simar, L. (2007), Advanced Robust and Nonparametric Methods in Efficiency Analysis. Methodology and Applications. New York, Springer.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrenberg, R. G. (2004), Econometric studies of higher education, Journal of Econometrics, 121: 19–37.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Esterle, L., Theves, J. (2005), Analysis of the different European systems for producing indicators, paper presented at the Lisbon Workshop on S&T Indicators Production, Lisbon 22–23 September 2005.

  • European Commission (2003), Third European Report on Science & Technology Indicators. Brussels, European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evidence Ltd (2006), The Quality Base of UK Science. Mimeo, June.

  • Filippini, M., Lepori, B. (2007), Cost structure, economies of capacity utilization and scope in Swiss Higher education institutions, In: [Bonaccorsi & Daraio, 2007a].

  • Godin, B. (2005), Measurement and Statistics on Science and Technology: 1920 to the Present. London, Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. (1994), Productivity, R&D, and the data constraint, American Economic Review, 84(1): 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hicks, D. (2004), The four literatures of social science, In: [Moed & al., 2004: 473–496].

  • Huisman, J., Kaiser, F. (Eds) (2001), Fixed and Fuzzy Boundaries in Higher Education. A Comparative Study of (Binary) Structures in Nine Countries. Den Haag, Adviesraad voor het Wetenschapsen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jongbloed, B., Lepori, B., Salerno, C., Slipersaeter, S. (2005), European Higher Education Institutions: Building a Typology of Research, CHINC report, IPTS, Seville.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, D. (2004), The scientific impact of nations. What different countries get for their research spending, Nature, 430: 311–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyvik, S. (2004), Structural changes in Higher Education systems in Western Europe. Higher Education in Europe, 29(3): 393–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyvik, S., Skovdin, O.-J. (2003), Research in the non-university higher education sector-tensions and dilemmas. Higher Education, 45: 203–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laredo, P. (Ed.) (2003), Observatoire Recherche Angevine. Sinthèse Enquete 2002. Paris, Technopolis France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepori, B., Benninghoff, M., Jongbloed, B., Salerno, C., Slipersaeter, S. (2007), Changing models and patterns of higher education funding: some empirical evidence. In: [Bonaccorsi & Daraio, 2007A].

  • Marchetti, C. (1989), The Nobel saga, Technology Review, Italian edition, March.

  • Marsh, L. C. (2004), The econometrics of Higher Education: editor’s view, Journal of Econometrics, 121: 1–18.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, A. C. (2004), The 2005 revision of the Carnegie Classification System. Presentation to the Washington Higher Education Secretariat. Washington D.C. June 8, 2004. Available online at: http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/Classification/future.htm

  • Musselin, C. (2004), Towards a European academic labor market? Some lessons drawn from empirical studies on academic mobility. Higher Education, 48: 55–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musselin, C. (2005), Le Marché des Universitaires. France, Allemagne, Etats-Unis. Paris, Presses de la Fondation National des Sciences Politiques.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neave, G., Van Vught, F. A. (1994), Government and Higher Education Relationships Across Three Continents. Oxford, Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slipersaeter, S. (2005), Comparisons of methodological approaches for determining research intensity at higher education institutions, paper presented at the Lisbon Workshop on S&T Indicators Production, Lisbon 22–23 September 2005.

  • Slipersaeter, S., Lepori, B., Jongbloed, B., Salerno, C. (2005), Collecting Institutional Level Data for European Higher Education Institutions: Evidence from the CHINC Project, CHINC report.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical Systems and Automation, School of Engineering, University of Pisa, Via Diotisalvi, 2, 56100, Pisa, Italy

    Andrea Bonaccorsi & Cinzia Daraio

Authors
  1. Andrea Bonaccorsi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Cinzia Daraio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Bonaccorsi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bonaccorsi, A., Daraio, C. The differentiation of the strategic profile of higher education institutions. New positioning indicators based on microdata. Scientometrics 74, 15–37 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-0101-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-008-0101-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation