Skip to main content
Log in

Change Management in Universities: More a question of balance than a pathway

  • Published:
Tertiary Education and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper focuses on assessing possible levers in the hands of a university’s top management team for inducing or managing change when faced with environmental drives. The topic is discussed after analysing change in a university over a 20-year period. The case study underlines the opportunities and difficulties of linking external environmental drives and change processes, highlighting the lack of a universal path and proposing elements that are worthy of attention. The paper underlines the need for top management teams in universities to pay particular attention to the systemic and balanced aspects of the factors determining change.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamford, D. (2008). The use of grounded theory in change management research. Journal of Change Management, 8(2), 111–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barblan, A., Daxner, M., & Ivosevic, V. (2007). Academic malpractice threats and temptations. Retrieved March 7, 2010, from https://doi.org/www.magna-charta.org/pdf/proceedings_essay.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berta, G. (2006). Torino, Miano e la questione settentrionale. Il Mulino, 4, 697–707.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boffo, S., & Moscati, R. (1998). Evaluation in the Italian higher educational system: Many tribes, many territories… many godfathers. European Journal of Education, 33(3), 349–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunsson, N. (1989). Administrative reforms as routines. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 5(3), 219–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • By, R. T., & Calum, M. (Eds.). (2009). Managing organizational change in public services. International issues, challenges and cases. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crozier, M. (1964). Lephenomene bureaucratique [The bureaucratic phenomenon]. Paris: Editions du Seuil.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Easterby-Smith, M. (1997). Disciplines of organizational learning: Contributions and critiques. Human Relations, 50(9), 1085–1113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(A), 532–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferlie, E., Musselin, C., & Andresani, G. (2008). The steering of higher education systems: A public management perspective. Higher Education, 56(3), 325–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrando, M. (2009). Campus all’italiana [The Italian campus]. Milano: Sole 24 ore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbst, M. (1999). Change management: A classification. Tertiary Education and Management, 5(2), 125–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, J. (1995). Kinds of power. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarzabkowski, P. (2003). Strategic practices: An activity theory perspective on continuity and change. Journal of Management Studies, 40(1), 23–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Cramer, M., Cross, R., & Yan, A. (2003). Sources of fidelity in purposive organizational change: Lessons from a re-engineering case. Journal of Management Studies, 40(7), 1837–1869.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maassen, P., & Olsen, J. P. (2007). European debates on the knowledge institution: The modernization of the university at the European level. In P. Maassen & J. P. Olsen (Eds.), University dynamics and European integration (pp. 3–22). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G., & Olsen J. P. (Eds.). (1976). Ambiguity and choice in organizations. Bergen: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meister-Scheytt, C., & Scheytt, T. (2005). The complexity of change in universities. Higher Education Quarterly, 59(1), 76–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, E., Rebora, G., & Turri, M. (2008). The structure and significance of the Italian research assessment exercise (VTR). In C. Mazza, P. Quattrone, & A. Riccaboni (Eds.), European universities in transition (pp. 221–236). London: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1983). Structure in fives. Designing effective organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muratbekova-Touron, M. (2005). Permanence and change: Case study of changes in organizational culture at a multinational company. Journal of Change Management, 5(2), 207–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, V. (2006). Leadership and strategic knowledge management. Knowledge Management Review, 9(4), 12–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Normann, R. (1977). Management for growth. Chichester: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Østergren, K., & Stensaker, I. (2009). Strategic responses to the quality reform: A comparative study of change in Norwegian higher education. In R. T. By & M. Calum (Eds.), Managing organizational change in public services. International issues, challenges and cases (pp. 197–215). Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrott, B. (2009). Managing public sector organizations in environmental turbulence. In R. T. By & M. Calum (Eds.), Managing organizational change in public services. International issues, challenges and cases (pp. 39–57). Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrotti, R. (2008). L’universita truccata. Torino: Einaudi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (1981). Power in organizations. Marshfield, MA: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollit, C., & Bouckeart, G. (2004). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prichard, C., & Willmott, H. (1997). Just how managed is the McUniversity? Organization Studies, 18(2), 287–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Probst, G., Raub, S., & Romhardt, K. (2000). Managing knowledge. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raven, B. H. (1992). A power-interaction model of interpersonal influence: French and Raven thirty years later. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7(2), 217–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rebora, G, & Turri, M. (2009). Governance in higher education: An analysis of the Italian experience. In J. Huisman (Ed.), International perspectives on the governance of higher education. Alternative frameworks for coordination (pp. 13–31). Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rego, A., Pinho, I., Pedrosa, J., & Pina e Cunha, M. (2009). Barriers and facilitators to knowledge management in university research centers. Management Research, 7(1), 33–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rumelt, R. P. (1995). Inertia and transformation. In C. A. Montgomery (Ed.), Resource-based and evolutionary theories of the firm (pp. 101–132). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday/Currency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, T. A. (1997). Intellectual capital. The new wealth of organizations. London: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H. (2005). Complex knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H., & Chia, R. (2002). On organizational becoming: Rethinking organizational change. Organization Science, 13(5), 567–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization Studies, 26(9), 1377–1404.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanThiel, S., & Leeuw, F. L. (2002). The performance paradox in the public sector. Public Performance and Management Review, 25(3), 267–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Krogh, G., Ichijo, K., & Nonaka, I. (2000). Enabling knowledge creation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, J., Peters, H. P., & Guan, J. (2006). Factors influencing knowledge productivity in German research groups: Lessons for developing countries. Journal of Knowledge Management, 10(4), 113–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(1), 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Matteo Turri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rebora, G., Turri, M. Change Management in Universities: More a question of balance than a pathway. Tert Educ Manag 16, 285–302 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2010.529162

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2010.529162

Navigation