Advertisement

Higher Education Policy

, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 447–461 | Cite as

And Now for Something Completely Different? Re-Examining Hybrid Steering Approaches in Higher Education

  • Jens Jungblut
  • Martina Vukasovic
Article
First Online:

Abstract

Using the seminal contribution by Gornitzka and Maassen on hybrid steering approaches in higher education as a foundation, this paper offers three main contributions. First of all, an analysis is provided of how the concept of hybrid steering approaches has been used since 2000 in the higher education literature. Second, the paper delivers a theoretical underpinning for the existence of hybrid steering in higher education stemming from institutional theory and policy analysis. Third, the paper deepens and broadens the concept of hybrid steering emphasizing the permanence of hybrids, their potential homogeneity and convergence over time. Furthermore, their relation to multi-level governance arrangements as well as interaction between global scripts and national filters is addressed. In the conclusion, several avenues for future research are offered.

Keywords

steering in higher education hybrid steering institutional theory policy analysis multi-level governance global scripts 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Amaral, A. and Magalhães, A. (2002) ‘The emergent role of external stakeholders in European higher education governance’, in A. Amaral, G.A. Jones and B. Karseth (eds.) Governing Higher Education: National Perspectives on Institutional Governance, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bleiklie, I. (2002) ‘Explaining change in higher education policy’, in P.R. Trowler (ed.) Higher Education Policy and Institutional Change: Intentions and Outcomes in Turbulent Environments, Buckingham: Open University Press, pp. 24–45.Google Scholar
  3. Braun, D. (2008) ‘Organising the political coordination of knowledge and innovation policies’, Science and Public Policy 35 (4): 227–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Castells, M. (2001) ‘Universities as dynamic systems of contradictory functions’, in J. Muller, N. Cloete and S. Badat (eds.) Challenges of Globalisation. South African Debates with Manuel Castells, Cape Town: Maskew Miller Longman, pp 206–223.Google Scholar
  5. Christensen, T. (2010) ‘University governance reforms: Potential problems of more autonomy?’ Higher Education 62 (4): 1–15.Google Scholar
  6. Clark, B.R. (1983) The Higher Education System: Academic Organization in Cross-National Perspective, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. Daviter, F. (2007) ‘Policy framing in the European union’, Journal of European Public Policy 14 (4): 654–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dolowitz, D.P. and Marsh, D. (2000) ‘Learning from abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy-making’, Governance 13 (1): 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elken, M., Gornitzka, Å., Maassen, P. and Vukasović, M. (2011) European Integration and the Transformation of Higher Education, Oslo: University of Oslo.Google Scholar
  10. Gornitzka, Å. (2006) ‘What is the use of Bologna in national reform? The case of Norwegian quality reform in higher education’, in V. Tomusk (ed.) Creating the European Higher Education Area: Voices from the Periphery, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 19–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gornitzka, Å., Kyvik, S. and Stensaker, B. (2005) ‘Implementation analysis in higher education’, in Å. Gornitzka, M. Kogan and A. Amaral (eds.) Reform and Change in Higher Education, Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer, pp. 35–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gornitzka, Å. and Maassen, P. (2000) ‘Hybrid steering approaches with respect to European higher education’, Higher Education Policy 13 (3): 267–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gornitzka, Å. and Maassen, P. (2011) ‘University governance reforms, global scripts and the “Nordic Model”. Accounting for policy change?’ in J. Schmid, K. Amos, J. Schrader and A. Thiel (eds.) Welten der Bildung? Vergleichende Analysen von Bildungspolitik und Bildungssystemen, Wiesbaden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, pp. 149–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hooghe, L. and Marks, G. (2003) ‘Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance’, American Political Science Review 97 (2): 233–243.Google Scholar
  15. Huisman, J., Adelman, C., Hsieh, C.-C., Shams, F. and Wilkins, S. (2012) ‘Europe’s Bologna Process and its impact on global higher education’, in D. Deardorff, H. deWit, J. Heyl and T. Adams (eds.) The Sage Handbook of International Higher Education, London: Sage Publications, pp. 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Huisman J., Stensaker B. and Kehm B. (eds.) (2009) ‘Bologna, Quo vadis?’ in The European Higher Education Area: Perspective on a Moving Target, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, pp. xiii–xx.Google Scholar
  17. Klemenčič, M. (2012) ‘The changing conceptions of student participation in HE Governance in the EHEA’, in A. Curaj, P. Scott, L. Vlasceanu and L. Wilson (eds.) European Higher Education at the Crossroads: Between the Bologna Process and National Reforms, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 631–653.Google Scholar
  18. Larsen, I.M., Maassen, P. and Stensaker, B. (2009) ‘Four basic dilemmas in university governance reform’, Higher Education Management and Policy 21 (3): 41–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Maassen, P. (2003) ‘Shifts in governance arrangements: An interpretation of the introduction of new management structures in higher education’, in A. Amaral, L. Meek and I.M. Larsen (eds.) The Higher Education Managerial Revolution? Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Pulbishers, pp. 31–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Maassen, P., Moen, E. and Stensaker, B. (2011) ‘Reforming higher education in the Netherlands and Norway: The role of the state and national modes of governance’, Policy Studies 32 (5): 479–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Maassen, P. and Olsen, J.P. (2007) University Dynamics and European integration, Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Meyer, J.W. (2000) ‘Globalization: Sources and effects on national states and societies’, International Sociology 15 (2): 233–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Meyer, J.W. (2009) ‘Reflections: Institutional theory and world society’, in G. Krücken and G.S. Drori (eds.) World Society: The Writings of John W. Meyer, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 36–63.Google Scholar
  24. Musselin, C. (2005) ‘Change or continuity in higher education governance?’ in I. Bleiklie and M. Henkel (eds.) Governing Knowledge, Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer, pp. 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Musselin, C. (2009) ‘The side effects of the Bologna Process on national institutional settings: The case of France’, in A. Amaral, G. Neave, C. Musselin and P. Maassen (eds.) European Integration and the Governance of Higher Education and Research, Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 181–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Olsen, J.P. (1988) ‘Administrative reform and theories of organization’, in C. Campbell and B.G. Peters (eds.) Organizing Governance, Governing Organizations, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 233–254.Google Scholar
  27. Olsen, J.P. (1995) Europeanisation and nation-state dynamics, ARENA Working Paper Series, (9), Oslo: ARENA Centre for European Studies.Google Scholar
  28. Olsen, J.P. (2007) ‘The institutional dynamics of the European university’, in P. Maassen and J.P. Olsen (eds.) University Dynamics and European Integration, Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer, pp. 233–254.Google Scholar
  29. Peters, B.G. (2001) The Future of Governing, Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  30. Pressman, J.L. and Wildavsky, A. (1984) Implementation. 3rd edn., Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  31. Sevón, G. and Czarniawska, B. (2005) Global ideas: How Ideas, Objects and Practices Travel in The Global Economy, Stockholm: Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press.Google Scholar
  32. Teichler, U., Arimoto, A. and Cummings, W.K. (2013) The Changing Academic Profession: Major Findings of a Comparative Survey, Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Thelen, K.A. and Mahoney, J. (2010) Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Thornton, P.H., Ocasio, W. and Lounsbury, M. (2012) The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure, and Process, Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Tsebelis, G. (2002) Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work, Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Voegtle, E., Knill, C. and Dobbins, M. (2011) ‘To what extent does transnational communication drive cross-national policy convergence? The impact of the Bologna process on domestic higher education policies’, Higher Education 66 (1): 77–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Weick, K.E. (1976) ‘Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems’, Administrative Sciences Quarterly 21 (1): 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Westerheijden, D., Beerkens, E., Cremonini, L., Huisman, J., Kehm, B., Kovač, A., Lažetić, P., McCoshan, A., Mozuraitytė, N., Souto Otero, M., de Weert, E., Witte, J. and Yağci, Y. (2010) The First Decade of Working on the European Higher Education Area: Executive Summary, Overview and Conclusions, Twente: CHEPS.Google Scholar
  39. Witte, J. (2006) ‘Change of degrees and degrees of change: Comparing adaptations of European higher education systems in the context of the Bologna process’, Ph.D. dissertation, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies. Enschede, the Netherlands: University of Twente.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Association of Universities 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jens Jungblut
    • 1
  • Martina Vukasovic
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options