Skip to main content

Performance agreements for clearer institutional profiles and better division of labour

Abstract

Performance agreements in higher education are seen as a promising steering tool in many countries, including Norway. The aims of the performance agreements in Norwegian higher education are to enhance quality and diversity through clearer institutional profiles and better division of labour between institutions. An expert group that carried out an assessment of the funding system recommended the Norwegian Ministry of Education & Research to implement institutional multi-year performance agreements to enhance quality, diversity and cooperation. In 2016–17 the Ministry implemented an incremental process covering initially five plus other five pilot institutions. This article gives an overview of the context, process and framework of performance agreements at the national level as well as how this new steering tool is being handled in one of the pilot institutions. It focuses on the implementation process and is based on qualitative observations and written communication between the Ministry and the pilot institutions. Although, it is still too early to evaluate the results and the impact of performance agreements in Norwegian higher education, the experience so far indicates that it seems to be possible through negotiations between the Ministry and the institutions to strengthen the institutional profile by prioritizing goals and measures. The content in the pilot agreements differ and no obligatory indicators are part of the agreements. The incremental implementation process has limited the discussion on complementarity. Even though actions towards the division of labour between institutions are an important part of some of the agreements, this seems to be a more challenging task than profiling.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. Binderkrantz, A. S., & Christensen, J. G. (2009). Governing Danish Agencies by Contract: From Negotiated Freedom to the Shadow of Hierarchy. Journal of Public Policy, 29, 55–78. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0143814X09000968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Birnbaum, R. (1983). Maintaining Diversity in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bouckaert, G., Peters G., & Verhoest, K. (2010). The Coordination of Public Sector Organizations. Shifting Patterns of Public Management. Palgrave Macmillan UK.

  4. de Boer, H., & Jongbloed, B. (2014). Reflections on performance agreements in higher education. Report for the Expert Group of the Ministry of Education and Research in Norway. Twente, the Netherlands: CHEPS..

  5. de Boer, H., Jongbloed, B., Benneworth, P., Cremonini, L., Kolster, R., Kottmann, A., Lemmens-Krug, K., & Vossensteyn, H. (2015). Performance-based funding and performance agreements in fourteen higher education systems. Twente: CHEPS .

  6. Dobbins, M., & Knill, C. (2017). Higher education governance in France, Germany and Italy: Change and variation in the impact of transnational soft governance. Policy and Society, 36(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1278868.

  7. Elken, M., Frølich, N., & Reymert, I. (2016). Steering approaches in higher education. Comparing Norway, Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands and UK (England). Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NIFU) Report 2016:35.

  8. European Commission (2011). Supporting growth and jobs – an agenda for the modernisation of Europe's higher education systems. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions. Brussels, 20.9.2011.

  9. Goedegebuure, L. C. J., Kaiser, F., Maassen, P. A. M., Meek, V. L., van Vught, F. A., & de Weert, E. (1994). International perspectives on trends and issues in higher education policy. In L. C. J. Goedegebuure, F. Kaiser, P. A. M. Maassen, V. L. Meek, F. A. van Vught, & E. de Weert (Eds.), Higher Education Policy. An International Comparative Perspective. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hægeland, T., Ervik, A. O., Foss Hansen, H., Hervik, A., Lommerud, K. E., Ringdal, O., Sahlin, K., Steinveg, B. E., & Stensaker, B. (2015). Finansiering for kvalitet, mangfold og samspill. Nytt finansieringssystem for universiteter og høyskoler. Forslag fra ekspertgruppe oppnevnt av Kunnskapsdepartementet 8. april 2014..

  11. Hanssen, G. S., Mydske, P. K., & Dahle, E. (2013). Multi-level coordination of climate change adaption: by national hierarchical steering or by regional network governance? Local environment, 18(8), 869–887. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2012.738657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hood, C. (1983). The tools of government. London: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Huisman, J. (1998). Differentiation and diversity in higher education systems in Higher education: Handbook of theory and research. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Huisman, J., Meek, L., & Wood, F. (2007). Institutional diversity in higher education: a cross-national and longitudinal analysis. Higher Education Quarterly, 61(4), 563–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jongbloed, B., Kaiser, F., van Vught, F., & Westerheijden, D. F. (2018). Performance Agreements in Higher Education: A New Approach to Higher Education Funding. In A. Curaj, L. Deca, & R. Pricopie (Eds.), European Higher Education Area: The Impact of Past and Future Policies (pp. 671–687). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77407-7_40.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Kyvik, S. & Lepori, B. (2010): The Research Mission of Higher Education Institutions outside the University Sector. Higher Education Dynamics, 31.

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

    Google Scholar 

  18. Meek, L. Goedegebuure, L., & Huisman, J. (2000). Understanding diversity and differentiation in higher education: an overview, Higher Education Policy, 13.

  19. OECD (2017). Reviews of Innovation Policy: Norway.

  20. Olsen, J. P. (2002). Konstitusjonsdebatt og reformer: Europeiske eksperimenter og norsk nøling (Constitutional 16 debate and reforms: European experiments and Norwegian hesitation). Norsk Statsvitenskapelig Tidsskrift, 18, 91–116.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Prøitz, T., & Aasen, P. (2017). Making and Re-making the Nordic Model of Education. In P. Nedergaard & A. Wivel (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Scandinavian Politics. London: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Reichert, S. (2009). Institutional Diversity in European Higher Education: Tensions and Challenges for Policy Makers and Institutional Leaders. Brussels: EAU.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Scharpf, F. W. (1997). Games Real Actors Play: Actor-centered Institutionalism In Policy Research, Boulder (Colo) by Westview press.

  24. Trow, M. (1979). Elite and mass higher education: American models and European realities. Research into Higher Education: Process and Structures. Stockholm: National Board of Universities and Colleges.

  25. van Vught, F. (2009). Diversity and Differentiation in Higher Education, Higher Education Dynamics, 1–16.

  26. White Paper (Meld. St. 18 (2014–2015)). Konsentrasjon for kvalitet — Strukturreform i universitets- og høyskolesektoren. Kunnskapsdepartementet.

  27. White Paper (Meld. St. 7 (2014–2015)). Long-term plan for research and higher education 2015–2024, Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research.

  28. White Paper (Meld. St. 25 (2016–2017). The Humanities in Norway, Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research Summary in English.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ingvild Marheim Larsen.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

USN Partnership & USN Professional

List of qualitative and quantitative indicators.

Table 1 USN Partnership
Table 2 USN Profession

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Larsen, I.M., Hofsøy, ML., Yuan, Z.Ø. et al. Performance agreements for clearer institutional profiles and better division of labour. Tert Educ Manag 26, 311–327 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11233-019-09034-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Diversity
  • Governance
  • Higher education policy/development
  • Institutional performance measures
  • Strategic planning