Politics, Power and Ideology in Higher Education

  • Rosemary DeemEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9553-1_132-1


Politics is a concept which refers to conflicts and disagreements over ideas and actions, particularly ideas and actions arising from ideological debates. It can be applied to any organization or sphere, not just political parties and mainstream politics. Importantly, anyone, not just a elected politician or policy maker can be a political actor, and organizations are ideal locations for such political actors (a person who creates government policy). In the case of higher education institutions, staff (whether academic, administrative, technical, or manual), students, and external stakeholders can all be political actors, though some argue that academics are scientists rather than political actors (Grant 2016). But they can be both. Organizational politics is fairly common as an object of exploration in higher education research, whether this refers to disputes between academics in different or the same disciplines, tensions between academics and administrators/leaders, or...

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


  1. Altbach, P. 2015. Knowledge and education as international commodities. International Higher Education. E-journal 50. https://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ihe/article/view/7997.  https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2008.50.7997
  2. Althusser, L. 1977. Ideology and ideological state apparatuses (notes towards an investigation). In Lenin and philosophy and other essays, ed. L. Althusser. London: New Left Books.Google Scholar
  3. Bachrach, P., and M.S. Baratz. 1962. Two faces of power. The American Political Science Review 56 (4): 947–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnett, R. 2003. Beyond all reason: Living with ideology in the university. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Berger, D., and C. Wild. 2016. The teaching excellence framework: Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here. Higher Education Review 48 (3): 5–22.Google Scholar
  6. Bleiklie, I. 2012. Collegiality and hierarchy: Coordinating principles in higher education. In The global university, ed. A. Nelson and I. Wei, 85–104. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bosch, T. 2016. Twitter activism and youth in South Africa: The case of #RhodesMustFall. Information Communication and Society 20 (2): 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brookes, R., et al. 2015. Students’ unions, consumerism and the neo-liberal university. British Journal of Sociology of Education 37: 1211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Budd, R. 2016. Undergraduate orientations towards higher education in Germany and England: Problematizing the notion of ‘student as customer’. Higher Education 73 (1): 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dahl, R. 1961. Who governs? Democracy and power in an American city. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Danowitz, M.A. 2016. Power, jobs and bodies: The experiences of becoming a gender scholar in doctoral education. Studies in Higher Education 41 (5): 847–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deem, R. 2016. Recent research evaluations in the UK and Portugal: Methodologies, processes, controversies and consequences. In Global challenges, National Initiatives, and institutional responses – The transformation of higher education, ed. C. Sarrico, P. Teixeira, A. Magalhaes, et al., 159–186. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. Deem, R., and K.J. Brehony. 2005. Management as ideology: The case of ‘new managerialism’ in higher education. Oxford Review of Education 31 (2): 213–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Deem, R., et al. 2007. Knowledge, higher education and the new managerialism: The changing management of UK universities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Department for Business Innovation and Skills. 2016. Success as a knowledge economy: Teaching excellence, social mobility and student choice (government white paper). London: Department for Business Innovation and Skills. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/higher-education-success-as-a-knowledge-economy-white-paper.Google Scholar
  16. DiMaggio, P.J., and W.W. Powell. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48 (2): 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Forbes-Mewett, H., and C. Nyland. 2013. Funding international student support services: Tension and power in the university. Higher Education 65 (2): 181–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gewirtz, S., et al. 1995. Markets, choice and equity in education. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Goodman, R., et al., eds. 2013. Higher education and the state: Changing relationships in Europe and East Asia. Symposium Books: Oxford.Google Scholar
  20. Gornitzka, A., and I.M. Larsen. 2004. Towards professionalisation? Restructuring of administrative work force in universities. Higher Education 47: 455–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grant, J. 2016. Sausages, evidence and policy making: The role for universities. Unpublished plenary, society for research into higher education annual conference, Newport.Google Scholar
  22. Gross, N., and S. Simmons, eds. 2014. Professors and their politics. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Grossberg, L., and J.D. Slack. 1985. An introduction to Stuart Hall’s essay. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 2 (Spring): 87–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gumport, P. 2000. Academic restructuring: Organizational change and institutional imperatives. Higher Education 39 (1): 67–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Harris, S. 2007. The governance of education: How neo-liberalism is transforming policy and practice. London: Continuum Press.Google Scholar
  26. Hüther, O., and G. Krucken. 2014. Incentives and power: An organizational perspective. In Incentives and performance, ed. I.M. Welpe, J. Wollershei, S. Ringelhan, and M. Osterloh, 69–86. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Lukes, S. 1974. Power: A radical view. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Magalhães, A., et al. 2016. The changing role of external stakeholders: From imaginary friends to effective actors or non-interfering friends. Studies in Higher Education 19: 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McFee, M., and K. Zeppel. 2015. Gender equality in the age of academic capitalism: Cassandra and Pollyanna interpret university restructuring. Social Politics 22: 561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McHaig, C. 2016. The retreat from widening participation? The National Scholarship Programme and new access agreements in English higher education. Studies in Higher Education 41 (2): 215–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meyer, J.W., and B. Rowan. 1977. Institutionalised organisations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology 83: 340–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meyer, J.W., and B. Rowan. 1988. The structure of educational organisations. In Culture and power in educational organisations, ed. A. Westoby. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Sadan, E. 2004. Empowerment and community planning: Theory and practice of people-focused social solutions (trans: Richard Flantz). Israel. http://www.mpow.org/elisheva_sadan_empowerment_intro.pdf.
  34. Sarrico, C., and A.I. Melo. 2014. Performance management systems and their influence on the governance structures of Portuguese universities: A case study. In Incentives and performance: Governance of research organisations, ed. I.M. Welpe, J. Wollersheim, S. Ringelhan, and M. Osterloh, 413–430. Dordrecht/New York/London: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Soares, J. 2007. The power of privilege: Yale and America’s elite colleges. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Storey, J. 2015. Cultural theory and popular culture: An introduction. 7th ed. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Toliver, S.D., et al. 2015. Intra-racial dynamics of black faculty and black students: Barriers to success in the academy In predominantly white institution. European Scientific Journal 1:33–40.Google Scholar
  38. Trowler, P., et al., eds. 2012. Tribes and territories in the 21st-century: Rethinking the significance of disciplines in higher education. Routledge: London.Google Scholar
  39. Veiga, A., et al. 2015. From collegial governance to Boardism: Reconfiguring governance in higher education. In The Palgrave international handbook of higher education policy and governance, ed. J. Huisman, H. De Boer, D. Dill, and M. Souto-Otero, 398–416. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Weber, M. 1965. Politics as a vocation. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.Google Scholar
  41. Whitchurch, C. 2012. Reconstructing identities in higher education: The rise of third space professionals. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Royal Holloway University of LondonLondonUK

Section editors and affiliations

  • Alberto Amaral
    • 1
  • António Magalhães
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.CIPESUniversity of PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.Faculty of Psychology and Education SciencesUniversity of PortoPortoPortugal
  3. 3.Centre for Research in Higher Education Policies (CIPES)PortoPortugal