Abstract
The article focuses on recent shifts in modes of coordination and the emerging drive towards new public management (NPM) in higher education and examines Lithuanian higher education policy as an example. It investigates the dynamics of the shift by exploring how stakeholders define the term and how, in turn, it influences the political agenda. Using secondary literature review, primary document analysis and a range of interviews with stakeholders active in the higher education policy process in Lithuania, the study places Lithuanian developments against the wider European trends in higher education policy. The findings suggest that after 15 years of changing the modes of coordination in Lithuania's public sector, NPM rhetoric has recently begun to penetrate the higher education policy agenda. How far it will influence university management and academic work is still questionable.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Procedural autonomy is the power of a higher education institution to determine the means by which its goals and programmes will be pursued (Neave and Van Vught, 1994, 8).
Three Es — economy, efficiency and effectiveness (De Boer and Huisman, 1999, 111).
State regulation concerns the traditional notion of top-down authority vested in the state. This dimension refers to regulation by directives; the government prescribes (in detail) behaviours under designed circumstances. Regulation refers to the promulgation of an authoritative set of rules. It primarily entails the use of legal rules, involving the specification of conditions under which activities may be undertaken. It implies controlling an actor's behaviour through monitoring, standard setting, inspection, warranty approval, certification, arbitration (De Boer et al., 2004).
The chapters on England and Germany were written within the scope of the German Research Council (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) funded research project on ‘Decision making processes in management and self-governance models of universities and the consequences for research’. The project group is (in alphabetical order) comprised of Dr. Harry de Boer, Professor Jürgen Enders, Professor Barbara Kehm, Dr. Ute Lanzendorf and Professor Uwe Schimank. The authors of this article are grateful to authors of the chapters of England and Germany.
The three streams are not the same as in the Dutch higher education system.
References
Adamkus, V. (2004) ‘Annual Report of the President of Lithuania to the Parliament of Lithuania, Available at www.president.lt.
Amaral, A., Jones, A.J. and Karseth, B. (2002) Governing Higher Education: National Perspectives on Institutional Governance, Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Braun, D. and Merrien, F.X. (1999) ‘Governance of Universities and Modernisation of the State, in D. Braun and F.X. Merrien (eds.) New Managerialism and the Governance of Universities in a Comparative Perspective, London/Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 9–33.
Brunnson, N. (1996) The Organization of Hypocrisy. Talk, Decisions and Actions in Organizations, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Clark, B. (1983) The Higher Education System, Berkeley, Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.
Clark, B.R. (1998) Creating Entrepreneurial Universities: Organizational Pathways of Transformation, Oxford: Elsevier Science for IAU Press.
Clarke, J. and Newman, J. (1997) The Managerial State, London: Sage.
Commission of the European Communities. (2005) Mobilising the brainpower of Europe: enabling universities to make their full contribution to the Lisbon strategy. EC Commission staff working paper No. 152. Available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/regdoc/rep/2/2005/EN/2-2005-518-EN-1-0.Pdf.
Currie, J., De Angelis, R., De Boer, H., Huisman, J. and Lacotte, C. (2003) Globalizing Practices and University Responses, Westport/Connecticut/London: Praeger.
Daujotis, V., Radzvilas, V., Slizys, R.P. and Stumbrys, E. (2002) Lietuvos mokslo politika Europos kontekste (Lithuanian research policy in the European context), Vilnius: Justitia.
De Boer, H. (2002) ‘Trust, the Essence of Governance? in A. Amaral, A.J. Jones and B. Karseth (eds.) Governing Higher Education: National Perspectives on Institutional Governance, Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 43–62.
De Boer, H., Enders, J. and Leisyte, L. (2006) ‘Public sector reform in Dutch higher education: the organizational transformation of the university’, Public Administration (in press).
De Boer, H., Enders, J. and Schimank, U. (2005) ‘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, Berlin: Springer, pp. 1–22.
De Boer, H. and Huisman, J. (1999) ‘The New Public Management in Dutch Universities, in D. Braun and F.X. Merrien (eds.) Towards a New Model of Governance for Universities, London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 100–119.
De Boer, H., Leisytë, L. and Enders, J. (2004) Higher Education in the Netherlands, Enschede: University of Twente, CHEPS.
Enders, J. (2002) Governing the Academic Commons: About Blurring Boundaries, Blistering Organisations, and Growing Demands, Enschede: University of Twente, CHEPS.
Enders, J. and Leisytë, L. (2004) The university as a successfully failing organisation? Shifts in governance and new public management in higher education. Paper presented at the EGOS Conference; 1–3 July, Ljubljana.
Ferlie, E., Ashburner, L., Fitzgerald, L. and Pettigrew, A. (1996) The New Public Management in Action, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goedegebuure, L.C.J., Kaiser, F., Maassen, P.A.M., Meek, V.L., van Vught, F.A. and de Weert, E. (1994) Higher Education Policy: An International Comparative Perspective, Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Glosiene, A. (2005) Results and Conclusions of the Monitoring of the EU Structural Funds Use in the Field of Research, Vilnius: Civic Society Institute.
Henkel, M. (2000) Academic Identities and Policy Change in Higher Education, London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Kaunas Technology University, Strategic Plan of 2005–2007, Available at http://www.ktu.lt.
Kehm, B.M. and Lanzendorf, U. (2006) ‘Germany-16 Lander Approaches to Reform’, in B.M. Kehm and U. Lanzendorf (eds.) Reforming University Governance. Changing Conditions for Research in Four European Countries, Bonn: Lemmens, pp. 129–179.
Kogan, M., Bauer, M., Bleiklie, I. and Henkel, M. (2000) Transforming Higher Education: A Comparative Study, London: Jessica Kingsley.
Leisytë, L., de Boer, H. and Enders, J. (2006 ‘England – the Prototype of the ‘Evaluative State’,in B.M. Kehm and U. Lanzendorf (eds.) Reforming University Governance. Changing Conditions for Research in Four European Countries, Bonn: Lemmens, pp. 17–52.
Lietuvos rytas. (2005/12/12) ‘No. 288 Politicians are to be blamed for the decline in higher education, Interview with Vilnius University Rector B. Juodka.
Lithuanian Science Council. (2005a) Aukštuju mokyklu valdymo, kai jos auksciausios institucijos- tarybos — daugumą sudaro socialiniai partneriai, modelio projektas). (Proposed model on higher education governance, when the majority of Council (the highest governing level) consists of social partners), Vilnius: Lithuanian Science Council.
Lithuanian Science Council. (2005b) Lietuvos mokslo tarybos nutarimo projektas Dël studiju procesu aukštosios mokyklose ir paramos studentams tobulinimo (The Project of the Lithuanian Science Council on the improvement of higher education process and student support). Available at http://www.lms.lt.
Meek, V.L. (2002) ‘On the Road to Mediocrity? in A. Amaral, G.A. Jones and B. Karseth (eds.) Governing Higher Education: National Perspectives on Institutional Governance, Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Neave, G. and van Vught, F.A. (1991) Prometheus Bound; The Changing Relationship between Government and Higher Education in Western Europe, Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Neave, G. and van Vught, F.A (1994) Government and Higher Education Relationships Across Three Continents: The Winds of Change, Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Pauliukonis, A. (2005) Presentation at the President's Office, Vilnius, April, 2005.
Pollitt, C. (1993) Managerialism and the Public Services (2nd eds), Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Pollitt, C. (2004) Institute of Governance Studies Visiting Lecture, May 12, Enschede: IGS.
Pollitt, C. and Bouckaert, G. (2000) Public Management Reform. A Comparative Analysis, Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Reed, M.R. (2002) ‘New Managerialism, Professional Power and Organisational Governance in UK Universities: A Review and Assessment, in A. Amaral, A.J. Jones and B. Karseth (eds.) Governing Higher Education: National Perspectives on Institutional Governance, Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer, pp. 163–186.
Schimank, U., Kehm, B. and Enders, J. (1999) ‘Institutional Mechanisms of Problem Processing of the German University System: Status Quo and New Developments, in D. Braun and F.X. Merrien (eds.). Towards a New Model of Governance for Universities? A Comparative View, London/Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 179–194.
Stensaker, B. (2004) The transformation of organisational identities Dissertation, CHEPS, Enschede.
Taylor, J. and Miroiu, A. (2002) Policy-Making, Strategic Planning, and Management of Higher Education, Bucharest: UNESCO-CEPES.
Texeira, P., Jongbloed, B., Dill, D. and Amaral, A. (2004) Markets in Higher Education, Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
The Government of the Lithuanian Republic. (1991) The bye-law regarding the payment of the employees of higher education and research institutions, no. 483.
The Government of the Republic of Lithuania. (2000) The Program of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania for the period of 2001 to 2004, Vilnius. Available at: http://smm.lt/veiklos_planai_ir_programos/docs/II_svietimas_mokslas.htm.
The Government of the Republic of Lithuania. (2001) The bye-law regarding the approval of the methodology on the study cost of higher education institutions, expenditure on research, indirectly related to the organization of study costs, no. 836.
The Government of the Republic of Lithuania. (2003) The Program of the Government of the Republic of Lithuania for the period of 2004 to 2008, Vilnius. Available at: http://smm.lt/veiklos_planai_ir_programos/docs/II_svietimas_mokslas.htm.
The Government of the Republic of Lithuania. (2005) Aukštojo mokslo sistemos 2006–2010 metu plëtros planas (The Development Plan of Lithuanian Higher Education System in the period from 2006–2010). Available at http://www.mokslas.lt.
The Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania. (1991) The Law on Science and Higher Education, I-1052, Vilnius: Valstybes zinios, no. 7–191.
The Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania. (2000) The Law on Higher Education, VIII-1586. Vilnius: Valstybes zinios, no. 27-715.
The World Bank. (2003) Lithuania aiming for a knowledge economy, The World Bank Europe and Central Asia Region.
UNESCO, Institute for Statistics. (2002/2003). Available at http://stats.uis.unesco.org.
Vilnius Pedagogical University., Available at http://www.vpu.lt.
Vilnius University report. (2004). Available at http://w3.vu.lt/?lang=lt&s0=apiemus&s1=dokumentai_apie_vu.
Zalys, A. (2004) Lithuanian research and development system. An overview. Presentation at R&D Management Training Program; October 11–18, 2004, Olympic Parktel, Seoul, Korea.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix A
(1) The Government and the MoES regulate the activities of higher education institutions. The Parliament performs the legislative role in higher education not only by passing the laws and its amendments, but by approving key documents in higher education, like university statutes or higher education budget.
(2) Lithuanian Science Council is an expert institution reporting to Government and Parliament on science and higher education organization and funding questions; The Higher Education Council is an expert institution reporting to the Ministry. The government approves its statute. Rectors Conference coordinates the relations among the higher education institutions and government bodies. For the definitions of other expert organizations, see article 19, LHE, 2000.
Appendix B
Bye-law No: 836 of the Government of the Lithuanian Republic (2001). Regarding the approval of the methodology on the study cost of higher education institutions, expenditure on research, indirectly related to the organization of study costs.
Current criteria for research funding are based on fundamental, applied research outputs an artistic outputs; outputs of participation in the international programmes; number of contracts funded not from businesses, Ministries, etc. Criteria of efficiency are defined by the Ministry in consultation with the Science Council of Lithuania, Higher Education Council, the Rector's conference and proposals from the relevant ministries.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Leisytë, L., Kizniene, D. New Public Management in Lithuania's Higher Education. High Educ Policy 19, 377–396 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.hep.8300122
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.hep.8300122