Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

College Rankings as an Interorganizational Dependency: Establishing the Foundation for Strategic and Institutional Accounts

  • Published:
Research in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Higher education administrators believe that revenues are linked to college rankings and act accordingly, particularly those at research universities. Although rankings are clearly influential for many schools and colleges, this fundamental assumption has yet to be tested empirically. Drawing on data from multiple resource providers in higher education, we find that the influence of rankings depends on constituencies’ placement in the higher education field. Resource providers who are vulnerable to the status hierarchy of higher education––college administrators, faculty, alumni, and out-of-state students––are significantly influenced by rankings. Those on the periphery of the organizational field, such as foundations and industry, are largely unaffected. Although rankings are designed largely for stakeholders outside of higher education, their strongest influence is on those within the higher education field.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allison, P. D. (2002). Missing data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastedo, M. N. (2004, August). Strategic decoupling: Building legitimacy in educational policy environments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, San Francisco, CA.

  • Bastedo, M. N. (2005). The making of an activist governing board. Review of Higher Education, 28, 551–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastedo, M. N. (2007). Bringing the state back in: Promoting and sustaining innovation in public higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 61, 155–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastedo, M. N. (2009a). Conflicts, commitments, and cliques in the university: Moral seduction as a threat to trustee independence. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 354–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastedo, M. N. (2009b). Convergent institutional logics in public higher education: State policymaking and governing board activism. Review of Higher Education, 32, 209–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastedo, M. N., & Bowman, N. A. (2010). The U.S. News and World Report college rankings: Modeling institutional effects on organizational reputation. American Journal of Education, 116, 163–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastedo, M. N., & Gumport, P. J. (2003). Access to what? Mission differentiation and academic stratification in U.S. public higher education. Higher Education, 46, 341–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (2006). EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Encino, CA: Multivariate Software, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, M. (2000). Controlling Hollywood: Censorship and regulation in the studio era. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equation models with latent variables. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, N. A., & Bastedo, M. N. (2009). Getting on the front page: Organizational reputation, status signals, and the impact of U.S. News and World Report on student decisions. Research in Higher Education, 50, 415–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, N. A., & Bastedo, M. N. (in press). Anchoring effects on world university rankings: Exploring biases in reputation scores. Higher Education.

  • Brewer, D. J., Gates, S. M., & Goldman, C. A. (2001). In pursuit of prestige: Strategy and competition in U.S. higher education. Somerset, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coburn, C. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional environment and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77, 211–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council for Aid to Education. (2009). Voluntary support of education survey. Retrieved June 7, 2009, from http://www.cae.org/content/pro_data_trends.htm.

  • Crabbe, N. (2009, June 17). On survey, Machen rates UF with Harvard, other Fla. schools low. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://bit.ly/y9AAb.

  • Davis, G. F., & Greve, H. (1997). Corporate elite networks and governance changes in the 1980s. American Journal of Sociology, 103, 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dempster, A. P., Laird, N. M., & Rubin, D. B. (1977). Maximum likelihood estimation from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 29, 1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J. (1983). State expansion and organizational fields. In R. H. Hall & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Organizational theory and public policy (pp. 147–161). Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment (pp. 3–22). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J. (1991). Constructing an organizational field as a professional project: U.S. art museums, 1920–1940”. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 267–292). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L. (1996). The normal science of structural contingency theory. In S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy, & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook of organizational studies (pp. 57–76). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, J., & Dukerich, J. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 517–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsbach, K. D., & Kramer, R. (1996). Members’ responses to organizational identity threats: Encountering and countering the Business Week rankings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 442–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espeland, W. N., & Sauder, M. (2007). Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology, 113, 1–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espeland, W. N., & Stevens, M. (1998). Commensuration as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 312–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fligstein, N. (1997). Social skill and institutional theory. American Behavioral Scientist, 40, 397–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, S. R. (2007, April 7). College rankings serve students, Crow and ASU. The Arizona Republic.

  • Griffith, A., & Rask, K. (2007). The influence of the U.S. News and World Report collegiate rankings on the matriculation decision of high-ability students: 1995-2004. Economics of Education Review, 26, 244–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guler, I., Guillen, M. F., & MacPherson, J. M. (2002). Global competition, institutions and the diffusion of organizational practices: The international spread of ISO 9000 quality certificates. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47, 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, M., & Morphew, C. (2008). What’s being sold and to what end? A content analysis of college viewbooks. Journal of Higher Education, 79, 671–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoover, E. (2007, September 7). The ‘U.S. News’ rankings roll on. Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(2), A45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Institute for Higher Education Policy (IHEP). (2009). The role and relevance of rankings in higher education policymaking. Washington, DC: IHEP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaschik, S. (2007, March 19). Should U.S. news make presidents rich? Inside Higher Ed. Accessed on March 21, 2009 at http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/03/19/usnews.

  • Jin, G. Z., & Whalley, A. (2007). The power of information: How do U.S. News rankings affect the financial resources of public colleges? National Bureau of Economic Research working paper no. 12941. Cambridge, MA: NBER.

  • Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, D. (2009a, June 3). Manipulating, er, influencing U.S. News. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/03/rankings.

  • Lederman, D. (2009b, June 9). The best university? Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/09/clemson.

  • Lee, S. (2009, August 19). Reputation without rigor. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/08/19/rankings.

  • Little, R. J. A., & Rubin, D. B. (2002). Statistical analysis with missing data (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley-Interscience.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13, 103–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martins, L. L. (2005). A model of the effects of reputational rankings on organizational change. Organization Science, 16, 701–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maruyama, G. M. (1998). Basics of structural equation modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonough, P. M., Antonio, A. L., Walpole, M., & Perez, L. X. (1998). College rankings: Democratized college knowledge for whom? Research in Higher Education, 39, 513–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLachlan, G. J., & Krishnan, T. (1997). The EM algorithm and extensions. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meredith, M. (2004). Why do universities compete in the rankings game? An empirical analysis of the effects of the U.S. News and World Report college rankings. Research in Higher Education, 45, 443–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1948). The self-fulfilling prophecy. In Social theory and social structure (pp. 475–490). New York: Free Press.

  • Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monks, J., & Ehrenberg, R. G. (1999). The impact of U.S. News & World Report college rankings on admissions outcomes and pricing policies at selective private institutions. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper #7227.

  • Morse, R., & Flanigan, S. (2008). How we calculate the rankings. Retrieved June 7, 2009, from http://bit.ly/1GDd20.

  • National Science Foundation. (2008). Survey of research and development expenditures at universities and colleges. Retrieved June 7, 2009, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/srvyrdexpenditures/.

  • Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16, 145–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, M. W. (1985). Emerging developments in postsecondary organization theory and research: Fragmentation or integration. Educational Researcher, 14, 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (2003). Introduction to the classic edition. In reprint of the external control of organizations. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

  • Pfeffer, J. (2005). Developing resource dependence theory: How theory is affected by its environment. In K. G. Smith & M. A. Hitt (Eds.), Great minds of management: The process of theory development (2nd ed., pp. 436–459). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pusser, B., Slaughter, S., & Thomas, S. L. (2006). Playing the board game: An empirical analysis of university trustee and corporate board interlocks. Journal of Higher Education, 77, 747–775.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, H. (1994). The social construction of reputation: Certification contests, legitimation, and the survival of organizations in the American automobile industry: 1895–1912. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, H., Monin, P., & Durand, R. (2003). Institutional change in Toque Ville: Nouvelle cuisine as an identity movement in French gastronomy. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 795–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauder, M. (2006). Third parties and status position: How the characteristics of status systems matter. Theory and Society, 35, 299–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauder, M., & Espeland, W. N. (2009). The discipline of rankings: Tight coupling and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 74, 63–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauder, M., & Fine, G. A. (2008). Arbiters, entrepreneurs, and the shaping of business school reputations. Sociological Forum, 23, 699–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (2008). Institutions and organizations (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R., & Davis, G. F. (2007). Organizations and organizing: Rational, natural, and open system perspectives. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selznick, P. (1949). TVA and the grass roots. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, M. L. (2007). Choosing a class: College admissions and the education of elites. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, M. L., Armstrong, E. A., & Arum, R. (2008). Sieve, incubator, temple, hub: Empirical and theoretical advances in the sociology of higher education. Annual Review of Sociology, 34, 127–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thacker, L. (2005). College unranked: Ending the college admissions frenzy. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thornton, P. H., & Ocasio, W. (1999). Institutional logics and the historical contingency of power in organizations: Executive succession in the higher education publishing industry, 1958–1990. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 801–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolbert, P. S. (1985). Institutional environments and resource dependence: Sources of administrative structure in institutions of higher education. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toma, J. D., Dubrow, G., & Hartley, J. M. (2005). The uses of institutional culture: Strengthening identification and building brand equity in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkwein, J. F., & Grunig, S. D. (2005). Resources and reputation in higher education: Double, double, toil and trouble. In J. C. Burke (Ed.), Achieving accountability in higher education: Balancing public, academic, and market demands (pp. 246–274). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkwein, J. F., & Sweitzer, K. V. (2006). Institutional prestige and reputation among research universities and liberal arts colleges. Research in Higher Education, 47, 129–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westphal, J. D., & Zajac, E. J. (2001). Decoupling policy from practice: The case of stock repurchase programs. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46, 202–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Our sincere thanks to the first author’s Organizations Workshop at the University of Michigan School of Education, which provided wonderful feedback to both authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Michael N. Bastedo

  2. University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA

    Nicholas A. Bowman

Authors
  1. Michael N. Bastedo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicholas A. Bowman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Michael N. Bastedo or Nicholas A. Bowman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bastedo, M.N., Bowman, N.A. College Rankings as an Interorganizational Dependency: Establishing the Foundation for Strategic and Institutional Accounts. Res High Educ 52, 3–23 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-010-9185-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-010-9185-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation