Advertisement

Quality pp 1-22 | Cite as

Introduction

  • Peter Dahler-LarsenEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Among the many words and numbers which circulate in our contemporary world, descriptors of quality are particularly numerous. Ratings, rankings, metrics, indicators, auditing, accreditation, benchmarking, smileys, user reviews, dashboards, international comparisons, and various forms of quality reports are used to capture quality.

References

  1. Barry, Andrew. 2012. Political Situations: Knowledge Controversies in Transnational Governance. Critical Policy Studies 6 (3): 324–336.Google Scholar
  2. Beck, Ulrich. 1992. Risk Society. Towards a New Modernity. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Berger, Peter L., Brigitte Berger, and Hansfried Kellner. 1973. The Homeless Mind: Modernization and Consciousness. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  4. Boltanski, Luc. 2011. Pragmatisk Sociologi [Pragmatic Sociology. A Reader]. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzel.Google Scholar
  5. Bruno, Isabelle, Emmanuel Didier, and Tommaso Vitale. 2014. Statactivism. Forms of Action between Disclosure and Affirmation. Partecipazione e Conflitto 7 (2): 198–220.Google Scholar
  6. Butler, Judith. 2010. Performative Agency. Journal of Cultural Economy 3 (2): 147–161.Google Scholar
  7. Buzan, Barry, Ole Wæver, and Jaap de Wilde. 1998. Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  8. Dahler-Larsen, Peter. 2008. Kvalitetens Beskaffenhed [The Nature of Quality]. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark.Google Scholar
  9. ———. 2012. The Evaluation Society. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. ———. 2014. Global Inscription Devices and the Politics of Education. Knowledge Cultures 2 (4): 90–109.Google Scholar
  11. Dahler-Larsen, Peter, Tineke A. Abma, Maria Bustelo, Roxana Irimia, Sonja Kosunen, Iryna Kravchuk, Elena Minina, Christina Segerholm, Eneida Shiroma, Nicoletta Stame, and Charlie Kabanga Tshali. 2017. Evaluation, Language, and Untranslatables. American Journal of Evaluation 38 (1): 114–125.Google Scholar
  12. Dambrin, Claire, and Keith Robson. 2011. Tracing Performance in the Pharmaceutical Industry: Ambivalence, Opacity and the Performativity of Flawed Measures. Accounting, Organizations and Society 36 (7): 428–455.Google Scholar
  13. Desrosières, Alain. 2009. How to be Real and Conventional: A Discussion of the Quality Criteria of Official Statistics. Minerva 47: 307–322.Google Scholar
  14. ———. 2014. Statistics and Social Critique. Partecipazione e conflitto 7 (2): 348–359.Google Scholar
  15. DiMaggio, Paul, and Walter Powell. 1983. The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review 48 (6): 147–160.Google Scholar
  16. Erkkilä, Tero, and Ossi Piironen. 2014. (De)politicizing Good Governance: The World Bank Institute, the OECD and the Politics of Governance Indicators. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 27 (4): 344–360.Google Scholar
  17. Espeland, Wendy N., and Michael Sauder. 2007. Rankings and Reactivity: How Public Measures Recreate Social Worlds. American Journal of Sociology 113 (1): 1–40.Google Scholar
  18. Gorz, André. 1980. Ecology as Politics. Boston: South End Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hay, Colin. 2012. Interpreting Interpretivism Interpreting Interpretations: The New Hermeneutics of Public Administration. Public Administration 89 (1): 167–182.Google Scholar
  20. Jensen, Casper Bruun. 2011. Making Lists, Enlisting Scientists: The Bibliometric Indicator, Uncertainty and Emergent Agency. Science Studies 24 (2): 64–84.Google Scholar
  21. Kaltenbrunner, Wolfgang, and Sarah de Ricjke. 2017. Quantifying ‘Output’ for Evaluation: Administrative Knowledge Politics and Changing Epistemic Cultures in Dutch Law Faculties. Science and Public Policy 44 (2): 284–293.Google Scholar
  22. Kauko, Jaakko, Risto Rinne, and Tuomas Takala. 2018. Politics of Quality in Education. A Comparative Study of Brazil, China, and Russia. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Koselleck, Reinhart. 2007. Begreber, Tid og Erfaring. En tekstsamling [Concepts, Time and Experience: An Anthology]. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzel. Collection of chapters originally published in Koselleck, R. 2000. Zeitschichten: Studien zur Historik. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.Google Scholar
  24. Latour, Bruno. 2004. Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern. Critical Inquiry 30 (2): 225–248.Google Scholar
  25. Meyer, John W. 2008. Building Education for a World Society. In Changing Knowledge and Education, ed. M.A. Pereyra, 31–49. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  26. Meyer, John W., and Brian Rowan. 1977. Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony. American Journal of Sociology 83: 340–363.Google Scholar
  27. Mjøset, Lars. 2009. The Contextualist Approach to Social Science Methodology. In The SAGE Handbook of Case-Based Methods, ed. D. Byrne and C.C. Ragin, 39–68. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. Palonen, Kari. 2002. The History of Concepts as a Style of Political Theorizing: Quentin Skinner’s and Reinhart Koselleck’s Subversion of Normative Political Theory. European Journal of Political Theory 1 (1): 91–106.Google Scholar
  29. Pirsig, Robert M. 1974. Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
  30. Pollock, Neil, Luciana D’Adderio, Robin Williams, and Ludovic Leforestier. 2018. Conforming or Transforming? How Organizations Respond to Multiple Rankings. Accounting, Organizations and Society 64: 55–68.Google Scholar
  31. Porter, Theodore M. 1994. Making Things Quantitative. Science in Context 7 (3): 389–407.Google Scholar
  32. Power, Michael. 1997. The Audit Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. ———. 2016. Postscript. On Riskwork and Auditwork. In Essays on the Organizational Life of Risk Management, ed. Michael Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Radaelli, Claudio M., and Fabrizio De Francesco. 2007. Regulatory Quality in Europe: Concepts, Measures and Policy Processes. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Rasmussen, Erik. 1981. Lighedsbegreber [Equality Concepts]. Copenhagen: Berlingske.Google Scholar
  36. Roberts, John. 2018. Managing only with Transparency: The Strategic Functions of Ignorance. Critical Perspectives on Accounting 55: 53–60.Google Scholar
  37. Schutz, Alfred. 1978. Phenomenology and the Social Sciences. In Phenomenology and Sociology, ed. T. Luckmann, 119–141. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  38. Schwandt, Thomas A. 1994. Constructivist, Interpretivist Approaches to Human Inquiry. In Handbook of Qualitative Research, ed. N. Denzin and Y. Lincoln, 118–137. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. ———. 2002. Evaluation Practice Reconsidered. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  40. ———. 2015. Evaluation Foundations Revisited: Cultivating a Life of the Mind for Practice. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Shore, Cris, and Susan Wright. 2015. Governing by Numbers: Audit Culture, Rankings and the New World Order. Social Anthropology 23 (1): 22–28.Google Scholar
  42. Stake, Robert E. 2004. Standard-Based and Responsive Evaluation. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  43. Stark, David. 2009. The Sense of Dissonance, Accounts of Worth in Economic Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Taylor, David, and Susan Balloch. 2005. The Politics of Evaluation: Participation and Policy Implementation. Bristol: Policy Press.Google Scholar
  45. Vattimo, Gianni. 2005. Nihilisme og Emancipation. Etik, Politik, Ret [Nihilsm and Emancipation. Ethics, Politics, and Law]. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Vedung, Evert. 1997. Public Policy and Program Evaluation. New Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations