Minerva

, Volume 50, Issue 4, pp 511–532 | Cite as

Managerialism Rhetorics in Portuguese Higher Education

Article

Abstract

In Portugal, as elsewhere, the rhetoric of managerialism in higher education is becoming firmly entrenched in the governmental policymakers’ discourse and has been widely disseminated across the institutional landscape. Managerialism is an important ideological support of New Public Management policies and can be classified as a narrative of strategic change. In this paper, we analyse how far the managerialism narrative has been injected into the discursive repertory of Portuguese academics in their role as the co-ordinators of the higher education institutions’ teaching and academic middle levels. Based on an analysis of interview responses, it seems that most academics support traditional academic values such as autonomy and collegiality, and reject university or polytechnic governance based on corporate philosophy.

Keywords

Excellence Managerialism New Public Management Higher Education Portugal 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by a grant from FCT (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia-Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology): PTDC/CPE-PEC/104759/2008.

References

  1. Amâncio, Lígia. 2005. Reflections on science as a gendered endeavour: Changes and continuities. Social Science Information 44: 65–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amaral, Alberto, António Magalhães, and Rui Santiago. 2003. The rise of academic managerialism in Portugal. In The higher education managerial revolution?, eds. Alberto Amaral, Lynn Meek, and Ingvild M. Larsen, 101–123. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldridge, J.Victor. 1971. Power and conflict in the university. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Barnett, Ronald. 2004. Beyond all reason: Living with ideology in the university. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Becker, Tony, and Paul Trowler. 2001. Academic tribes and territories. London: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bleiklie, Ivar, and Svein Michelsen. 2008. The university as enterprise and academic co-detremination. In From governance to identity. A festschrift for Mary Henkel, eds. Alberto Amaral, Ivar Bleiklie, and Christine Musselin, 57–80. London: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1989. Langage et Pouvoir Simbolique. Paris: Éd. du Seuil.Google Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, Pierre. 2000. Pascalian meditations. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bourdieu, Pierre. 2006. As estruturas sociais da economia. Porto: Campo das Letras.Google Scholar
  10. Carvalho, Teresa, and Rui Santiago. 2010a. New public management and ‘middle-management’: How do deans influence institutional policies? In The changing dynamics of higher education middle management, eds. L. Meek, L. Goedegebuure, R. Santiago, and T. Carvalho. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Carvalho, Teresa, and Rui Santiago. 2010b. New challenges for women seeking an academic career: The hiring process in Portuguese HEIs. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 32(3): 239–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carvalho, Teresa, and Rui Santiago. 2010c. Still academics after all. Higher Education Policy 23: 397–411.Google Scholar
  13. Clarke, John, and Janet Newman. 1997. The managerial state. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Cohen, Michael, and James March. 1986. Leadership and ambiguity—The American college president. New York: Carnegie/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  15. Considine, Mark. 2001. The tragedy of common-rooms? Political science and the new university governance. Australian Journal of Political Science 36(1): 145–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Costea, Bogdan, Norman Crump, and Kostas Amiridis. 2007. Managerialism and « infinite human resourcefulness »: a commentary on the « therapeutic habitus », « derecogniton of finitude » and the modern sense of self. Journal for Cultural Research 1: 245–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. de Weert, Egbert. 2001. Pressures and prospects facing the academic profession in the Netherlands. Higher Education 41: 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dearlove, John. 2002. A continuing role for academics: The governance of UK universities in the post-Dearing era. Higher Education Quarterly 56: 257–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Deem, Rosemary, Sam Hillyard, and Mike Reed. 2007. Knowledge, higher education, and the new managerialism, the changing management of UK universities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Enders, Jürgen, Harry de Boer, and Liudvika Leisyte. 2008. On striking the right notes: Shifts in governance and organisational transformations of universities. In From governance to identity. A festschrift for Mary Henkel, eds. Alberto Amaral, Ivar Bleiklie, and Christine Musselin, 113–130. London: Springer.Google Scholar
  21. Enteman, Willard. 1993. Managerialism. London: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  22. Ferlie, Ewan, Lynn Ashburner, Louise Fitzgerald, and Andrew Pettigrew. 1996. The new public management in action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Foucault, Michel. 1975. Vigiar e Punir. Petropolis: Vozes.Google Scholar
  24. Foucault, Michel. 1991. Governmentality. In The Foucault effect, studies in governmentality, eds. Graham Burchel, Collin Gordon, and Peter Miller, 87–104. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  25. Friedberg, Erhard, and Christine Musselin. 1992. En quête d’universités: etude comparée des universités en France et en RFA. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  26. Friedberg, Erhard, and Christine Musselin. 1993. L’État face aux universities en France et en Allemagne. Paris: Antthropos.Google Scholar
  27. Fulton, Oliver. 2003. Managerialism in UK universities: Unstable hybridity and the complications of implementation. In The higher education managerial revolution?, eds. Alberto Amaral, Lynn Meek, and Ingvild M. Larsen, 155–178. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Glaser, Barney. 1978. Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  29. Hood, Christopher. 1991. A public management for all seasons? Public Administration 69(Spring): 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jean-François, Lyotard. 1984. The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge, vol. 10. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  31. Meek, Lynn. 2002. On the road to mediocrity? Governance and management of Australian higher education in the market place. In Governing higher education: National perspectives on institutional governance, eds. Alberto Amaral, Glen A. Jones, and Berit Karseth, 235–260. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  32. Meek, Lynn. 2003. Governance and management of Australian higher education; Enemies within and without. In The higher education managerial revolution?, eds. Alberto Amaral, Lynn Meek, and Ingvild M. Larsen, 149–171. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  33. Meek, Lynn, Leo Goedegebuure, Rui Santiago, and Teresa Carvalho. 2010. Introduction. In The changing dynamics of higher education middle management, eds. Meek, Lynn, Goedegebuure, Leo, Santiago, Rui and Carvalho, Teresa, 1st ed., 1–14. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, New York: Series Higher Education Dynamics, Springer. ISBN: 978-90-481-9162-8.Google Scholar
  34. Middlehurst, Robin, and Lewis Elton. 1992. Leadership and management in higher education. Studies in Higher Education 17: 251–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Miller, Henry. 1995. The management of changes in universities. Buckingham: SHRE/Open University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Miller, Henry. 1998. Managing academics in Canada and the United Kingdom. International Studies in Sociology of Education 8: 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Milles, Matthew, and A. Michael Huberman. 1984. Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Bevery Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  38. Musselin, Christine. 2008. Towards a sociology of academic work. In From governance to identity. A festschrift for Mary Henkel, eds. Alberto Amaral, Ivar Bleiklie, and Christine Musselin, 47–56. London: Springer.Google Scholar
  39. Neave, Guy, and Frans van Vught. 1994. Changing relationship between government and higher education in Western Europe. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  40. Olssen, Mark, and Michael A. Peters. 2005. Neoliberalism, higher education and the knowledge economy: From the free market to knowledge capitalism. Journal of Educational Policy 20: 313–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Peters, J. Thomas, and Robert H. Waterman. 1984. In search of excellence. New York: Warner Book Edition.Google Scholar
  42. Readings, Bill. 1997. The university in ruins. Cambridge/MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Reed, Michael. 2002. New managerialism, professional power and organisational governance in UK universities: A review and assessment. In Governing higher education: National perspectives on institutional governance, eds. Alberto Amaral, Glen A. Jones, and Berit Karseth, 163–186. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  44. Santiago, Rui, and Teresa Carvalho. 2004. Effects of managerialism on the perceptions of higher education in Portugal. Higher Education Policy 17: 427–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Santiago, Rui, and Teresa Carvalho. 2008. Academics in a new work environment: The impact of new public management on work conditions. Higher Education Quarterly 62: 204–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Santiago, Rui, Teresa Carvalho, Alberto Amaral, and Lynn Meek. 2006. Changing patterns in the middle management of higher education institutions: The case of Portugal. Higher Education 52: 215–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Scott, Peter. 1995. The meaning of mass higher education. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Sotirakou, Tatiana. 2004. Coping with conflict within the entrepreneurial university: Threat or challenge for heads of departments in the UK higher education context. International Review of Administrative Science 70: 345–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Toren, Nina. 2001. Women in academe: The Israel case. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 21: 50–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Weick, Karl. 1976. Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly 21: 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wernick, Andrew. 2003. Academic horizons. Theory, Culture & Society 20: 41–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Winchester, Hilary, Shard Lorenzo, Lyn Browning, and Colleen Chesterman. 2006. Academic women’s promotions in Australian universities. Employee Relations 28: 505–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Aveiro and CIPESAveiroPortugal

Personalised recommendations