Advertisement

Governance in internationalen Hochschulkooperationen – ein konzeptueller Rahmen

  • Younes Qrirou
Chapter
Part of the Educational Governance book series (EDUGOV, volume 43)

Zusammenfassung

Durch eine Verknüpfung akteurtheoretischer Kategorien der Educational Governance mit Ansätzen der interorganisationalen Forschung soll der vorliegende konzeptuelle Rahmen zum Verständnis der Hintergründe und Koordinationsprozesse von internationalen Hochschulkooperationen beitragen. Das Governance-Konzept wird hierzu genutzt, um Annahmen über Organisationsformen internationaler Hochschulkooperationen zu entwickeln. Es wird argumentiert, dass für eine prozessorientierte Beschreibung dieser Organisationsformen die formellen und informellen Akteurkonstellationen auf den Ebenen der Kooperation, Hochschulorganisationen und Förderungsumwelt analysiert und charakterisiert werden sollen. Abschließend werden empirische Zugänge diskutiert und der Beitrag zur Educational Governance-Forschung aufgezeigt.

Schlüsselbegriffe

Hochschulkooperationen Akteurkonstellationen Organisationsformen prozessorientierte Beschreibung 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Altbach, P.-G., & Knight, J. (2007). The Internationalization of Higher Education: Motivations and Realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3/4), 290-305.Google Scholar
  2. Alter, C., & Hage, J. (1993). Organizations working together. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  3. Allmendinger, J., & Hinz, T. (2002). Perspektiven der Organisationssoziologie. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, Sonderheft 42, 9-28.Google Scholar
  4. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice. Journal of Public Research and Theory.18. 543-571.Google Scholar
  5. Amey, M. (2010). Adminstrative Perspectives on International Partnerships. New Directions For Higher Education 150, 57-67.Google Scholar
  6. Bartell, M. (2003). Internationalization of universities: A university culture-based framework. Higher Education 45, 43-70.Google Scholar
  7. Bachmann, R. (2001). Trust, Power and Control in Trans-Organizational Relations. Organization Studies 22(2), 337-365.Google Scholar
  8. Beerkens, E. (2002). International interorganisational arrangements in higher education: towards a typology. Tertiary Education and Management 8, 297–314.Google Scholar
  9. Benz, A., Lütz, S., Schimank, U., & Simonis, G. (Hrsg.) (2007). Handbuch Governance. Theoretische Grundlagen und empirische Anwendungsfelder. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  10. Blümel, A. (2013). Von der Hochschulverwaltung zum Hochschulmanagement. Wandel der Hochschulorganisation am Beispiel der Verwaltungsleitung. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
  11. Brandenburg, U., Höllermann, P., & Lipp, D. (2008). The laws of attraction: Erfolgsfaktoren in internationalen Hochschulkooperationen. die hochschule 1, 4–22.Google Scholar
  12. Brinkerhoff, J. (2002). Partnership for international development. Rhetoric or results. Boulder: LynneGoogle Scholar
  13. Riener. Bruce, C. (2001). Faculty-librarian partnerships in Australian higher education. Reference Services Review 29(2), 106–116.Google Scholar
  14. Bryson, J.-M., Crosby, B.-C., & Stone, M.-M. (2006). The Design and Implementation of Cross-Sector Collaborations: Propositions from the Literature. Public Administration Review, Special Issue, 44-55.Google Scholar
  15. Bryson, J.-M., Crosby, B.- C., & Stone, M.-M. (2015). Designing and Implementing Cross-Sector Collaborations: needed and challenging. Public Administration Review 75(5), 647–663.Google Scholar
  16. Cao, Z., & Lumineau, F. (2015). Revisiting the interplay between contractual and relational governance: A qualitative and meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Operations Management 33-34, 15-42.Google Scholar
  17. Cummings, J.-N., & Kiesler, S. (2007). Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations. Research Policy 36, 1620–1634.Google Scholar
  18. Cyert, R.-M., & March, J.-G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewoord Cliffs: Prenctice-Hall.Google Scholar
  19. Dacin, M.-T., Oliver, C., & Roy, J.-P. (2007). The Legitimacy of strategic alliances: an institutional perspective. Strategic Management 28(2), 169-187.Google Scholar
  20. De Wit, H. (2002). The Internationalization of Higher Education in the United States of America and in Europe: A Historical, Comparative, and Conceptual Analysis. Westport: Greenwood.Google Scholar
  21. Eddy, P. (2010). Partnerships and collaborations in higher education. ASHE Higher Education Report 36 (2). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  22. Emerson, R.-M. (1962). Power-Dependence Relations. American Sociological Review 27 (1), 31-41.Google Scholar
  23. Enders, J. (2004). Higher education, internationalization, and the national state: Recent developments and challenges to governance theory. Higher Education 47, 361-382.Google Scholar
  24. Fromm, N. (2017). Zur Transnationalisierung von Hochschulbildung. Eine empirische Studie zur Interaktion hochschulpolitischer Akteure beim Aufbau bilateraler Hochschulen im Ausland. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  25. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91(3), 481-510.Google Scholar
  26. Gray, B. (1985). Conditions Facilitating Interorganizational Collaboration. Human Raltions 38 (10), 911-936.Google Scholar
  27. Hardy, C., Phillips, N., & Lawrence, T. (1998). Distinguishing Trust and Power in Interorganizational Relations: Forms and Facades of Trust. In J. Lane & R. Bachmann (Hrsg.), Trust within and between organizations. Conceptual issues and empirical applications (S. 64-87). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Healey, N.-M. (2015). Towards a risk-based typology for transnational education. Higher Education 69, 1-18.Google Scholar
  29. Human, S., & Provan, K.-G. (2000). Legitimacy Building in the Evolution of Small-Firm Multilateral Networks: A Comparative Study of Success and Demise. Administrative Science Quarterly 45. 327-365.Google Scholar
  30. Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2005). Managing to collaborate. The theory and practice of collaborative advantage. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Ioannidou, A. (2008). Governance-Instrumente im Bildungsbereich im transnationalen Raum. In S. Hartz & J. Schrader (Hrsg.), Steuerung und Organisation in der Weiterbildung (S. 91-110). Bad Heilbronn: Klinkhardt.Google Scholar
  32. Jansen, D. (2002). Netzwerkansätze in der Organisationsforschung. In J. Allmendinger & T. Hinz (Hrsg), Soziologie der Organisation (S. 88-118). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
  33. Klijn, E.-H. (2008). Governance and Governance Networks in Europe. An Assessment of ten years of research on the theme. Public Management Review 10(4). 505-525.Google Scholar
  34. Knight, J. (2011). Doubts and dilemmas with double degree programs. Globalisation and internationalisation of higher education [online monograph]. Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento (RUSC) 8(2), 297–312.Google Scholar
  35. Knight, J. (2015). Transnational education remodeled: Toward a common TNE framework. Journal of Studies in International Education 20(1), 34–47.Google Scholar
  36. Kussau, J., & Brüsemeister, T. (2007). Educational Governance: Zur Analyse der Handlungskoordination im Mehrebenensystem der Schule. In H. Altrichter, T. Brüsemeister & J. Wissinger (Hrsg), Educational Governance. Handlungskoordination und Steuerung im Bildungssystem (S. 15-55). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  37. Lane, C., & Bachmann R. (Hrsg.) (1998). Trust within and between organizations. Conceptual issues and empirical applications.Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Laudel, G. (1999). Interdisziplinäre Forschungskooperation: Erfolgsbedingungen der Institution „Sonderforschungsbereich“. Berlin: Sigma.Google Scholar
  39. Lowndes, V., & Skelcher, C. (1998). The dynamics of multi-organizational partnerships: An analysis of changing modes of governance. Public Administration 76, 313–333.Google Scholar
  40. Luhmann, N. (1988). Vertrauen. Ein Mechanismus zur Reduktion sozialer Komplexität. 3.Aufl. Stuttgart: Enke.Google Scholar
  41. Maag Merki, K., Langer, R., & Altrichter, H. (Hrsg.) (2014). Educational Governance als Forschungsperspektive. Strategien. Methoden. Ansätze. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
  42. Magnus, C.-D. (2016). Hochschulprojektmanagement: Individuelle Akteure gestalten Educational Governance und Management. Wiesbaden: Springer VS.Google Scholar
  43. March, J.-G., & Simon, H.- A. (1958). Organizations. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  44. Marginson, S., & Rhoades, G. (2002). Beyond national states, markets, and systems of higher education: A glonacal agency heuristic. Higher Education 43, 281-309.Google Scholar
  45. McGuire, M. (2006). Collaborative Public Management: Assessing What We Know and How We Know It. Public Administration Review, Special Issue, 33-43.Google Scholar
  46. Musselin, C. (2006). Are Universities specific organizations? In G. Krücken, A. Kosmützky, & M. Torka (Hrsg), Toward a Multiversity? Universities between Global Trend and national Traditions (S. 63-84). Bielefeld: Transcript.Google Scholar
  47. Neave, G. (1992). Managing higher education international cooperation: strategies and solutions. Reference document. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  48. Nuissl, H. (2002). Bausteine des Vertrauens – eine Begriffsanalyse. Berliner Journal für Soziologie 12(1). 87-108.Google Scholar
  49. Olson, M. (1965). The logic of collective action. Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Parsons, T. (1964). Beiträge zur soziologischen Theorie. Neuwied: Luchterhand.Google Scholar
  51. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G.-R. (2003). The External Control of Organizations. A Resource Dependence Perspective, 2. Aufl. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Phillips, N., Lawrence, T.-B., & Hardy, C. (2000). Inter-Organizational Collaboration and the Dynamics of Institutional Fields. Journal of Management Studies 37(1),23-43.Google Scholar
  53. Poppo, L., & Zenger, T. (2002). Do Formal Contracts and Relational Governance Function As Substitutes Or Complements? Strategic Management Journal 23, 707-725.Google Scholar
  54. Powell, W. (1990). Neither market nor hierarchy: Network forms of organization. Research in Organizational Behavior 12. 295–336.Google Scholar
  55. Powell, W., Koput, K.-W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996). Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly 41/ 1, 116-145.Google Scholar
  56. Powell, W., Koput, K.-W., White, D.-R., & Owen-Smith, J. (2005). Network Dynamics and Field Evolution: The Growth of Interorganizational Collaboration in the Life Sciences. American Journal of Sociology 110, 1132-1205.Google Scholar
  57. Provan, K.- G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 18 (2), 229–252.Google Scholar
  58. Provan, K.- G., & Milward, B.- H. (1995). A Preliminary Theory of Interorganizational Network Effectiveness: A Comparative Study of Four Community Mental Health Systems. Administrative Science Quarterly 40 (1), 1-33.Google Scholar
  59. Ring, P.-S., & van de Ven, A. (1994). Developmental processes of cooperative interorganizational relationships. Academy of Management Review 19(1),90–118.Google Scholar
  60. Rousseau, D.-M., Sitkin, S. B., Burt, R., & Camerer, C. (1998). Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review 23(3), 393-404.Google Scholar
  61. Scharpf, F. (2000). Interaktionsformen: Akteurzentrierter Institutionalismus in der Politikforschung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  62. Schimank, U. (2007a). Elementare Mechanismen. In A. Benz, S. Lütz, U. Schimank & G. Simonis (Hrsg), Handbuch Governance: Theoretische Grundlagen und empirische Anwendungsfelder (S. 29-45). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  63. Schimank, U. (2007b). Die Governance-Perspektive: Analytisches Potenzial und anstehende konzeptionelle Fragen. In H. Altrichter, T. Brüsemeister & J. Wissinger: Educational Governance: Handlungskoordination und Steuerung im Bildungssystem (S. 231-260). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  64. Schimank, U. (2016). Handeln und Strukturen: Einführung in die akteurtheoretische Soziologie. 5. Aufl. Weinheim, Basel: Beltz Juventa.Google Scholar
  65. Schrum, W., Genuth, J., & Chompalov, I. (2007). Structures of scientific collaboration. Baskerville: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  66. Spencer-Oatey, H. (2012). Maximizing the Benefits of International Education Collaborations: Managing Interaction Processes. Journal of Studies in International Education 17(3). 244-261.Google Scholar
  67. Suchmann, M.-C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. Academy of Management Review 20(3). 571-610.Google Scholar
  68. Sydow, J, & Windeler, A. (2004). Knowledge, Trust, and Control. Managing Tensions and Contradictions in a Regional Network of Service Firms. International Studies of Management & Organization 33(2), 69-99.Google Scholar
  69. Tarazona, M. (2012). Zur Institutionalisierung internationaler Studiengänge. Eine theoretische und empirische Untersuchung zur nachhaltigen Organisation von Joint- und Double-Degree-Programmen. Berlin: Berliner Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
  70. Teichler, U. (2007). Die Internationalisierung der Hochschulen: Neue Herausforderungen und Strategien. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.Google Scholar
  71. Thomson, A.- M., & Perry, J.- L. (2006). Collaboration processes: Inside the black box. Public Administration Review 66, 20–32.Google Scholar
  72. Ulnicane, I. (2015). Why do international research collaborations last? Virtuous circle of feedback loops, continuity and renewal. Science and Public Policy 42, 433-447.Google Scholar
  73. Vangen, S., & Huxham, C. (2012). The Tangled Web: Unraveling the Principle of Common Goals in Collaborations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 22, 731-760.Google Scholar
  74. Vangen, S.,Hayes, J.- P., & Cornforth, C. (2015). Governing cross-sector, inter-organizational collaborations. Public Management Review 17(9), 1237–1260.Google Scholar
  75. Vlaar, P.- W. L., van den Bosch, F.- A.J., & Volberda, H.-W. (2006). Coping with problems of understanding in interorganizational relationships: Using formalization as a means to make sense. Organization Studies 27(11), 1617–1638.Google Scholar
  76. Vlaar, P.- W. L., van den Bosch, F.- A.J., & Volberda, H.-W. (2007).On the Evolution of Trust, Distrust, and Formal Coordination and Control in Interorganizational Relationships. Toward an Integrative Framework. Group & Organization Management 32(4). 407-429.Google Scholar
  77. Wagner, C.-S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy 34, 1608-1618.Google Scholar
  78. Weick, K. (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks u.a.: Sage.Google Scholar
  79. Weick, K.- E., Sutcliffe, K.- M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science 16(4), 409–421.Google Scholar
  80. Wilkesmann, U., & Würmseer, G. (2009). Lässt sich Lehre an Hochschulen steuern? Auswirkungen von Governance-Strukturen auf die Hochschullehre. die hochschule 2, 33-46.Google Scholar
  81. Wilkins, S., & Huisman, J. (2012). The international branch campus as transnational strategy in higher education. Higher Education 64, 627-645.Google Scholar
  82. Williamson, O.- E.(1975). Markets and hierarchies: Analysis and antitrust implications. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  83. Zucker, L.G. (1986). Production of trust: Institutional sources of economic structure, 1840-1920. Research in Organizational Behavior 8, 53-111.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TübingenDeutschland

Personalised recommendations