Advertisement

University Governance—Organisational Centralisation and Engagement in European Universities

  • Ivar BleiklieEmail author
  • Svein Michelsen
  • Georg Krücken
  • Nicoline Frølich
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Global Higher Education book series (PSGHE)

Abstract

Few systematic comparative studies of European university organisations have been done so far. The chapter seeks to shed light on three questions: (1) Through what forms of organisational structures do universities make decisions? (2) To what extent do such forms vary across European universities? (3) How can the observed variation (or lack thereof) be explained? It develops a comparative organisational perspective and applies it in an analysis of decision-making structures in 26 European universities in eight countries focusing on two dimensions of decision-making in universities—engagement and decentralisation. The chapter investigates how pressures for reform in university governance are mediated by path dependencies created by political-administrative regimes and traditions which open up for and constrain internal governance and engagement processes.

References

  1. Baldersheim, H., & Rose, L. E. (2010). The politics of boundaries and borders. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  2. Bleiklie, I. (1998). Justifying the evaluative state. New public management ideals in higher education. European Journal of Education, 33(3), 299–316.Google Scholar
  3. Bleiklie, I., & Kogan, M. (2007). Organisation and Governance of Universities. Higher Education Policy, 20, 477–493.Google Scholar
  4. Bleiklie, I., & Michelsen, S. (2013). Comparing higher education policies in Europe—Structures and outcomes in eight countries. Higher Education, 65(1), 113–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bleiklie, I., Enders, J., Lepori, B., & Musselin, C. (2011). New public management, network governance and the university as a changing professional organisation. In T. Christensen & P. Lægreid (Eds.), Ashgate research companion to new public management. Ashgate: Aldershot.Google Scholar
  6. Bleiklie, I., Enders, J., & Lepori, B. (2015). Organisations as penetrated hierarchies Institutional change and variations in patterns of control in European universities. Organisation Studies, 36(7), 873–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bleiklie, I., Frølich, N., & Michelsen, S. (2013). Structuring perceptions of governance. Transforming Universities in Europe. Paper Prepared for the ECPR General Conference—Bordeaux, 5th–7th Sept.Google Scholar
  8. Brubacher, J. S. (1967). The autonomy of the university. How independent is the republic of scholars? Journal of Higher Education, 38(5), 237–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brunsson, N., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2000). Constructing organisations: The example of the public sector reform. Organisation Studies, 21(4), 721–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clark, B. R. (1983). The higher education system: Academic organisation in cross-national perspective. Berkley, Los Angeles, Oxford: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  11. Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1972). A garbage can model of organisational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2011). Beyond NPM? Some development features. In T. Christensen & P. Lægreid (Eds.), New public management. Ashgate: Aldershot.Google Scholar
  13. Cyert, R., & March, J. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  14. de Boer, H., Enders, J., & Leisyte, L. (2007). Public sector reform in Dutch higher education: the organisational transformation of the university. Public Administration, 85(1), 27–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. de Boer, H. (2012). Formal Autonomy Descriptions. TRUE working paper.Google Scholar
  16. Estermann, T., Nokkala, T., & Steinel, M. (2010). University Autonomy in Europe II. The Scorecard. European university Association.Google Scholar
  17. Enders, J., de Boer, H., & Weyer, E. (2013). Regulatory autonomy and performance. The reform of higher education re-visited. Higher Education, 65(1), 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frølich, N., & Caspersen, J. (2015). Institutional governance structures. In J. Huisman, J., H. de Boer, D. Dill, & M. Souto-Otero (Eds.), Handbook of higher education policy and governance. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  19. Hatch, M. J., & Cunliffe, A. (2006). Organisation theory: Modern, symbolic, and postmodern perspectives. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hüther, O., & Krücken, G. (2013). Hierarchy and power: A conceptual analysis with particular reference to new public management reforms in German Universities. European Journal of Higher Education, 3(4), 307–323.Google Scholar
  21. Knill, C. (1998). European policies: The impact of national administrative traditions. Journal of Public Policy, 18(1), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kogan, M., Bauer, M., Bleiklie, I., & Henkel, M. (Eds.). (2006). Transforming higher education. A comparative study. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organisations. A synthesis of the research. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  24. Musselin, C. (2007). Are universities specific organisations? In G. Krücken, A. Kosmützky, & M. Torka (Eds.), Towards a multiversity? Universities between global trends and national traditions. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.Google Scholar
  25. Neave, G. (2002). The stakeholder perspective historically explored. In J. Enders & O. Fulton (Eds.), Higher education in a globalizing world. International trends and mutual observations. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  26. Olsen, J. P. (2005). The institutional dynamics of the (European) University. ARENA Working Paper No. 15, Center for European Studies, University of Oslo, Mar 2005.Google Scholar
  27. Ongaro, E. (2010). The napoleonic administrative tradition and public management reform in France, Greece, Italy and Portugal. In M. Painter & B. G. Peters (Eds.), Tradition and public administration. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  28. Ongaro, E., & Valotti, G. (2008). Public management reform in Italy: Explaining the implementation gap. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 21(2).Google Scholar
  29. Padgett, J. F. (1980). Managing garbage can hierarchies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(4), 583–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Painter, M., & Peters, B. G. (2010). The analysis of administrative traditions. In M. Painter & B. G. Peters (Eds.), Tradition and public administration. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  31. Paradeise, C., & Thoenig, J. -C. (2013). Academic institutions in search of quality: Local Orders and global standards. Organisation Studies, 34(2), 189–218.Google Scholar
  32. Paradeise, C., & Thoenig, J. -C. (2015). In search of academic quality. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  33. Paradeise, C., Reale, E., Bleiklie, I., & Ferlie, E. (2009). University governance. Western European comparative perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Peters, B. G. (2001). The future of governing (2nd ed.). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  35. Peters, B. G. (2008). The Napoleonic tradition. The International Journal of Public Sector Management 21(2).Google Scholar
  36. Polanyi, M. (1962). The republic of science: Its political and economic theory. Minerva, I(1), 54–73.Google Scholar
  37. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2004). Public Management reform. A comparative analysis (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Scott, W. R. (1981). Organizations: Rational, natural and open systems. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  39. Seeber, M., Lepori, B., Montauti, M., et al. (2015). European universities as complete organisations? Understanding identity, hierarchy and rationality in public organisations. Public Management Review, 17(10), 1444–1474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Verhoest, K., Roness, P. G., Verschuere, B., Rubecksen, K., & MacCarthaigh, M. (Eds.). (2010). Autonomy and control in state agencies. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  41. Weick, K. (1976). Educational organisations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Whitley, R., & Gläser, J. (2007). The changing governance of the sciences. The advent of research evaluation systems. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ivar Bleiklie
    • 1
    Email author
  • Svein Michelsen
    • 1
  • Georg Krücken
    • 2
  • Nicoline Frølich
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Administration and Organization TheoryUniversity of BergenBergenNorway
  2. 2.INCHER-Kassel, International Centre for Higher Education Research, University of KasselKasselGermany
  3. 3.Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NIFU)OsloNorway

Personalised recommendations