Abstract
Managing by performance indicators (PIs) is an important and controversial issue for many stakeholders concerned with higher education in the university systems all over the world. This study analyzes the voluntary disclosures of PIs by Canadian universities. The sample consisted of the 44 universities used by Maclean’s Canadian Universities ranking, which divide the universities into Primarily Undergraduate, Comprehensive, and Medical-Doctoral. We were able to identify 123 PIs which were regrouped in 18 categories. The top two categories were disclosures about research and finance which are not surprising since research and the financing thereof appear to be the mission of most universities. The larger universities in the Medical-Doctoral category appear to engage in a much higher level of disclosure of PIs than the Comprehensive and Primarily Undergraduate categories. According to our results, voluntary disclosure of PIs is positively affected by university size and mission. These results seem to be consistent with disclosure theories, particularly political cost theory and legitimacy theory and with previous results in the corporate sector. They are relevant to different stakeholders concerned with higher education.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baker, J. (1997, May). Conflicting conceptions of quality: Policy implications for tertiary education. Paper presented at AIC Tertiary Education in New Zealand Conference, Wellington.
Benjamin, M. (1996). The design of performance indicator systems; theory as a guide to relevance. Journal of College Student Development, 37(6), 623–630.
Brennan, J. (1999). Evaluation of higher education in Europe. In M. Henkel & B. Little (Eds.), Changing relationships between higher education and the state (pp. 219–235). London: Jessica Kingsley.
CAFA. (1998, September). Performance funding and the university. CAFA Report, 14(1), 4.
CAFA. (2000, December). The spin we’re in. CAFA Report, 15(2), 1.
CAUT Bulletin. (1997, November). Performance indicators, 44(9), p. 8.
CAUT Bulletin. (2008, May). OECD Report Points Higher Education in Wrong Direction, 55(5), A6.
Cave, M., Hanney, S., Henkel, M., & Kogan, M. (1997). The use of performance indicators in higher education: The challenge of the quality movement (Higher Education Policy Series 3). London: Jessica Kingsley.
Cave, M., Hanney, S., & Kogan, M. (1991). The use of performance indicators in higher education: A critical analysis of developing practice (2nd ed.). London: Jessica Kingsley.
Coulter, R. P. (1996). Challenging performance indicators. OCUFA Forum, 11(3, Special Supplement), 4.
Coy, D., Tower, G., & Dixon, K. (1993). Quantifying the quality of tertiary education annual reports. Accounting and Finance, 33(2), 121–129.
David, D. (1996). The real world of performance indicators: A review of their selected use in selected commonwealth countries. Canada: Council of Ontario Universities.
Dixon, K., Coy, D., & Tower, G. (1991). External reporting by New Zealand universities 19851989: Improving accountability. Financial Accountability & Management, 7(3), 159–178.
El-Khawas, E., DePietro-Jurand, R., & Holm-Nielson, L. (1998, October 5–9). Quality assurance in higher education: Recent progress; challenges ahead. Paper supported by the World Bank as part of its contribution to the UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education, Paris.
Fielden, J., & Abercromby, K. (2001). Accountability and international cooperation in the renewal of higher education. UNESCO Higher Education Indicators Study. Paris: UNESCO.
Fisher, D., Rubenson, K., Rockwell, K., Grosjean, G., & Atkinson-Grosjean, J. (2000). Performance indicators: A summary. A study funded by the Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences.
Gibbins, M., & Loewen, D. (2005). An essay on accounting’s social complexity and fairness challenge. Canadian Accounting Perspectives, 4(2), 269–283.
Gilbert, S. (1994). Performance indicators for universities: Ogres or opportunities? Education Review Quarterly, 1(4), Cat. No 81-003.
Harris, J. (1998). Performance models. Public Productivity and Management Review, 22(2), 135–140.
Harvey, I. (2004). Analytical quality glossary. Quality Research International. Retrieved February 6, 2008, from https://doi.org/www.qualityresearchinternational.com
HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England). (2003). Performance indicators in higher education. Bristol.
Hyndman, N., & Eden, R. (2001). The coordination of mission, objective and targets in UK executive agencies. London: CIMA.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(3), 305–360.
Kyrillidou, M. (2002, August 8). Current context for performance indicators in higher education. Washington, DC: Association of Research Libraries.
Likierman, A. (1992). Financial reporting in the public sector. In D. Henry & C. Holtman (Eds.), Public sector accounting and financial control. London: Chapman and Hall.
Maclean’s Magazine (2005, November 14). Maclean’s universities rankings. Toronto: Rogers Publishing Limited.
Neave, G. (1988). On the cultivation of quality, efficiency, and enterprise: An overview of recent trends in higher education in western Europe 1986–1988. European Journal of Education, 23, 7–23.
Neave, G. (1998). The evaluative state reconsidered. European Journal of Education, 33(3), 265–285.
Nelson, B. (2007, October 13). Key performance indicators and balanced scorecards. Presentation at the Irish Universities Quality Board 5th Annual Conference, University of Galway, Ireland.
Nelson, M., Banks, W., & Fisher, J. (2003). Improved accountability disclosures by Canadian universities. Canadian Accounting Perspectives, 2(1), 77–107.
Newson, J. (1992). The decline of faculty influence: Confronting the effects of the corporate agenda. Ottawa: Carleton University Press.
Newson, J. (1998). The corporate-linked university: From social project to market force. Canadian Journal of Communication, 23(1), 107–124.
Normanton, E. L. (1971). Public accountability and audit: A reconnaissance. London: Macmillan.
OCUFA. (1996, June 1). Performance indicators: Accounting or bean-counting?
OCUFA. (2005, Fall). Playing the rating game, 10–12.
Shocker, A. D., & Sethi, S. P. (1974). An approach to incorporating social preferences in developing corporate action strategies. In S. P. Sethi (Ed.), The unstable ground: Corporate social policy in a dynamic society (pp. 67–80). Los Angeles, CA: Melville.
Smeby, J.-C., & Stensaker, B. (1999, March 15). National quality assessment systems in the Nordic countries: Developing a balance between external and internal needs. Higher Education Policy, 12(1), 3–14.
Spence, M. (1973). Job market signalling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355–374.
Tavenas, F. (2004). Quality assurance: A reference system for indicators and evaluation procedures. Report published for European University Association, Belgium, pp. 1–53.
Watts, R. L., & Zimmerman, J. L. (1986). Positive accounting theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Woodhouse, D. (1996, December). Quality assurance: International trends, preoccupations, and features. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 21(4), 347–357.
Yorke, M. (1995). Taking the odds-on chance: Using performance indicators in managing for the improvement of quality in higher education. Tertiary Education and Management, 1(1), 49–57.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Maingot, M., Zeghal, D. An Analysis of Voluntary Disclosure of Performance Indicators by Canadian Universities. Tert Educ Manag 14, 269–283 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/13583880802481666
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583880802481666