Advertisement

Changing Academic Identities in the Context of a Managerial University – Bridging the Duality Between Professions and Organizations

Evidence from the U.S. and Europe
  • Liudvika LeisyteEmail author
Chapter
Part of the The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective book series (CHAC, volume 13)

Abstract

Reforms focusing on privatization, deregulation, and cutbacks have increasingly drawn professional services into organizational settings. In the higher education sector these reforms have been pronounced since the 1990s. They have centralized university management and sought efficiencies in work processes by performance monitoring and competition. Occupations are seen as threatened by the organizational management under the new managerial regimes. Scholars of the relations between occupations and organizations note the duality between the two. They argue that maintaining the duality between occupations versus organizations needs to be bridged and one needs to find typologies which incorporate the two in a productive way. This paper provides an example of such a duality by focusing on academic profession and university organizational context. It aims to answer the question how the duality between occupations and organizations can be bridged in this particular sector? It does so though studying the changing work roles and identities of academics as they are ultimately the carriers of professional values and norms. Thereby two sub-questions are posed: What kind of dynamics threatens the holistic academic identity? Do organizational managerialism and academic capitalism replace disciplines as the source of identity for academics? Based on the evidence from the most recent studies on changing academic roles and identities on both sides of the Atlantic a typology of the dynamics of change in values in the organizational context is developed. The duality of occupations and organizations in the case of academic profession and universities can be bridged when professionals experience enriching or replacing value dynamics and thereby acquire hybrid identities.

Keywords

Institutional Environment Work Role Academic Freedom Academic Staff Technology Transfer Officer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Ackroyd, S., Kirkpatrick, I., & Walker, R. M. (2007). Public management reform in the UK and its consequences for professional organization: A comparative analysis. Public Administration, 85(1), 9–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alpert, D. (1985). Performance and paralysis: The organizational context of the American research university. Journal of Higher Education, 56(3), 241–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amaral, A., Meek, V. L., & Larsen, I. M. (Eds.). (2003). The higher education managerial revolution? Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Amaral, A., Bleiklie, I., & Musselin, C. (Eds.). (2008). From governance to identity. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Buckingham: Open University Press/SRHE.Google Scholar
  6. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (2001). Academic tribes and territories (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Open University Press/SRHE.Google Scholar
  7. Bentley, P., & Kyvik, S. (2012). Academic work from a comparative perspective: A survey of faculty working time across 13 countries. Higher Education, 63(4), 529–547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Braun, D., & Merrien, F.-X. (1999). Governance of universities and modernisation of the state: Analytical aspects. Towards a new model of governance for universities? A comparative view. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Google Scholar
  9. Bunton, S., & Mallon, W. (2007). The impact of centers and institutes on faculty life: Findings from a study of life sciences faculty at research-intensive universities’ medical schools. Innovative Higher Education, 32, 93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Campbell, T., & Slaughter, S. (1999). Faculty and administrators’ attitudes toward potential conflicts of interest, commitment, and equity in university-industry relations. Journal of Higher Education, 70(3), 309–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark, B. R. (1963). Faculty culture. In T. F. Lunsford (Ed.), The study of campus cultures. Boulder: Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education.Google Scholar
  12. Clark, B. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organization in cross-national perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  13. Clark, B. (1998). Creating entrepreneurial universities: Organizational pathways of transformation. New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  14. de Boer, H., Enders, J., & Leisyte, L. (2007). On striking the right notes: Shifts in governance and the organizational transformation of universities. Public Administration, 85(1), 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. De Bruijn, J. A. (2010). Managing professionals. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. de Weert, E. (2009). The organised contradictions of teaching and research: Reshaping the profession. In J. Enders & E. de Weert (Eds.), The changing face of academic life (pp. 134–154). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  17. Deem, R., Hillyard, S., Reed, M., & Reed, M. (2007). Knowledge, higher education, and the new managerialism: The changing management of UK universities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Douglass, M. (1970). Natural symbols: Explorations in cosmology. London: Barrie & Rockliff.Google Scholar
  19. Eckel, P., & Morphew, C. (2009). The organizational dynamics of privatization in public research universities. In C. Morphew & P. Eckel (Eds.), Privatizing the public university: Perspectives from across the academy (pp. 88–108). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Enders, J., & de Weert, E. (2009). The changing face of academic life: Analytical and comparative perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fairweather, J., & Beach, A. (2002). Variations in faculty work at research universities: Implications for state and institutional policy. Review of Higher Education, 26(1), 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism: The third logic. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  23. Geiger, R. (2004). Knowledge and money: Research universities and the paradox of the marketplace. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Gumport, P. (1993). The contested terrain of academic program reduction. Journal of Higher Education, 64(3), 283–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hakala, J. (2009). The future of the academic calling? Junior researchers in the entrepreneurial university. Higher Education, 57(2), 173–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Henkel, M. (2000). Academic identities and policy change in higher education (Vol. 46). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. Henkel, M. (2005). Academic identity and autonomy revisited. In I. Bleiklie & M. Henkel (Eds.), Governing knowledge: A study of continuity and change in higher education. A festschrift in honor of Maurice Kogan (pp. 145–165). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Huisman, J. (2009). International perspectives on the governance of higher education. Alternative frameworks for coordination. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Jain, S., George, G., & Maltarich, M. (2009). Academics or entrepreneurs? Investigating role identity modification of university scientists involved in commercialization activity. Research Policy, 38, 922–935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kehm, B., & Leisyte, L. (2010). Effects of new governance on research in the humanities: The example of medieval history. In D. Jansen (Ed.), Governance and performance in the German public research sector. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Kolsaker, A. (2008). Academic professionalism in the managerialist era: A study of English universities. Studies in Higher Education, 33(5), 513–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Krücken, G., & Meier, F. (2006). Turning the university into an organizational actor. In G. Drori, J. Meyer, & H. Hwang (Eds.), Globalization and organization: World society and organizational change (pp. 241–257). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lee, J., & Rhoads, R. (2004). Faculty entrepreneurialism and the challenge to undergraduate education at research universities. Research in Higher Education, 45(7), 739–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Leisyte, L. (2007). University governance and academic research: Case studies of research units in Dutch and English universities. Ph.D. thesis. Enschede: University of Twente, CHEPS.Google Scholar
  36. Leisyte, L. (2011). Research commercialization policies and their implementation in the Netherlands and in the US. Science and Public Policy, 38(6), 437–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Leisyte, L., & Dee, J. (2012). Changing academic practices and identities in Europe and the US. Critical perspectives. In J. C. Smart & M. B. Paulsen (Eds.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 123–206). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  38. Leisyte, L., Enders, J., & de Boer, H. (2008). The freedom to set research agendas – illusion and reality of the research units in the Dutch universities. Higher Education Policy, 21, 377–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Leisyte, L., Enders, J., & de Boer, H. (2009). The balance between teaching and research in Dutch and English universities in the context of university governance reforms. Higher Education, 58(5), 619–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Leisyte, L., Enders, J., & de Boer, H. (2010). Mediating problem choice: Academic researchers’ responses to changes in their institutional environment. In R. Whitley, J. Gläser, & L. Engwall (Eds.), Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation (pp. 291–324). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Loomis, C. P., & McKinney, J. C. (2002). Community and society by Ferdinand Tönnies. Devon: David and Charles.Google Scholar
  42. Lucas, L. (2006). The research game in academic life. Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  43. Maassen, P. (1996). Governmental steering and the academic culture. Enschede: CHEPS.Google Scholar
  44. Mallon, W. (2006). Centers, institutes, and academic decision making: Addressing “suburban sprawl” through strategies for “smart growth.”. In P. Eckel (Ed.), The shifting frontiers of academic decision making: Responding to new priorities, following new pathways (pp. 55–74). Westport: ACE/Praeger.Google Scholar
  45. Marton, S. (2005). Academics and the mode-2 society: Shifts in knowledge production in the humanities and social sciences. In I. Bleiklie & M. Henkel (Eds.), Governing knowledge: A study of continuity and change in higher education. A Festschrift in honour of Maurice Kogan (pp. 169–188). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. McCune, V., & Hounsell, D. (2005). The development of students’ ways of thinking and practising in three final-year biology courses. Higher Education, 49, 255–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Melguizo, T., & Strober, M. (2007). Faculty salaries and the maximization of prestige. Research in Higher Education, 48(6), 633–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mendoza, P. (2007). Academic capitalism and doctoral student socialization: A case study. Journal of Higher Education, 78(1), 71–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Morrell, K. (2006). Policy narrative: New labour’s reform of the national health service. Public Administration, 84(2), 367–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Morris, N., & Rip, A. (2006). Scientists’ coping strategies in an evolving research system: The case of life scientists in the UK. Science and Public Policy, 33(4), 253–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Musselin, C. (2005). Le Marché des universitaires. France, Allemagne, États-Unis. Paris: Science Po.Google Scholar
  52. Musselin, C. (2008). Towards the sociology of academic work. In A. Amaral, I. Bleiklie, & C. Musselin (Eds.), From governance to identity (pp. 47–56). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  53. Musselin, C. (2009). Profession, market, and organization: How is academia regulated? In J. Enders & E. de Weert (Eds.), The changing face of academic life: Analytical and comparative perspectives (pp. 117–133). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  54. Noordegraaf, M. (2011). Risky business: How professionals and professional fields (must) deal with organizational issues. Organization Studies, 32(10), 1349–1371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Noordegraaf, M., & Schinkel, W. (2010). Professional capital contested: A Bourdieusian analysis of conflicts between professionals and managers. Comparative Sociology, 10(1), 1–29.Google Scholar
  56. Perkins, D. (2006). Constructivism and troublesome knowledge. In J. H. F. Meyer & R. Land (Eds.), Overcoming barriers to student learning: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (pp. 33–47). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  57. Pollitt, C. (1993). Managerialism and the public services: Cuts or cultural change in the 1990s? Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  58. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2000). Public management reform. A comparative analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Rip, A. (2011). Protected spaces of science: Their emergence and future evolution in a changing world. In M. Carrier & A. Nordmann (Eds.), Science in the context of application (pp. 197–220). Springer: Boston Studies in Philosophy of Science.Google Scholar
  60. Roach, M., & Sauermann, H. (2010). A taste for science? Ph. D. scientists’ academic orientation and self-selection into research careers in industry. Research Policy, 39, 422–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schimank, U., & Winnes, M. (2000). Beyond Humboldt? The relationship between teaching and research in European university systems. Science and Public Policy, 27(6), 397–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schuster, J., & Finkelstein, M. (2006). The American faculty: The restructuring of academic work and careers. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Scott, W. R. (2008). Lords of the dance: Professionals as institutional agents. Organization Studies, 29(2), 219–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  65. Slaughter, S., Archerd, C., & Campbell, T. (2004). Boundaries and quandaries: How professors negotiate market relations. Review of Higher Education, 28(1), 129–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Suddaby, R., Cooper, C. J., & Greenwood, R. (2007). Transnational regulation of professional services: Governance dynamics of field level organizational change. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(4–5), 333–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Thompson, M., Ellis, R., & Wildawsky, A. (1990). Cultural theory. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  68. Trowler, P. (1998). Academics responding to change: New higher education frameworks and academic cultures. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Whitley, R., Gläser, J., & Engwall, L. (Eds.). (2010). Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  70. Ylijoki, O.-H. (2003). Entangled in academic capitalism? A case study on changing ideals and practices of university research. Higher Education, 45(3), 307–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ziman, J. (2000). Real science. What it is, and what it means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Center for Higher EducationTechnical University of DortmundDortmundGermany

Personalised recommendations