No abstract

PurposeIn recent times, universities have been faced with the challenge of implementing neoliberal ideas as a survival tactic. For instance, there is increasing pressure on academics globally to publish because of performance funding and other metrics like global rankings, which consider where and how much academics publish. This study explores how neoliberalism in higher education has influenced the academic profession.Design/methodology/approachThe study used two New Zealand universities as case studies to understand how the universities' academics respond to government formula for allocating public funding to universities and also how the universities respond to the changing higher education system in New Zealand. In total, 21 academics were interviewed and documents such as the strategic plans of the universities; policies, guidelines and procedures; Tertiary Education Union reports and media reports were analysed.FindingsThe study finds that neoliberal practices could lead to occupational stress that comes with the pressure to publish, increased teaching workload and casualisation of the academic job, especially amongst emerging academics.Originality/valueWhilst the topic is not entirely original, this study is pertinent and offers the following advice to stakeholders. A university's success is a function of its academics, and academics perform at an exceptional level because academics want to, not because academics are being made to. Unless governments and universities address the intense competition that results from funding allocation procedures, the less well-off academics will fail and some will be forced to compromise the duties that academics have. A collaborative and collegial higher education system that focuses on serving the public good can be an alternative.

In the era of the knowledge economy, universities are expected to contribute to the economic development of their countries. Therefore, their research agendas must be relevant to the local context and geared, though not uncritically, to the national educational agenda.To do this diligently requires research autonomy. However, due to the low government investment in research on the African continent, universities have had to rely on other sources of funding, which usually comes with strings attached. Our study investigates the case of Ghana, in particular, the University of Ghana, the leading research university in the country.We drew on resource dependence theory, which suggests that, despite external pressures on universities, they can enhance their autonomy through the implementation of strategic measures. Primarily, we analysed documents such as research reports, journal articles and speeches in the light of Clark's (1998) model of the "entrepreneurial university," which, if adapted with care and in a localised form in Ghana, may contribute to the research autonomy of its universities. We found that, although research autonomy in Ghanaian universities is limited due to their over-reliance on external donor funding, it is likely to be strengthened if the government of Ghana follows through on plans to increase research funding and universities continue with measures to diversify their funding sources.

In his writing in the mid-nineteenth century – The Idea of a University, John Henry Newman argues that the university provides a platform for human advancement through teaching and research. Over a century later, our public university now hedged on several social, political, ecological and economic factors that bully its traditional mission daily. More recently, neoliberalism – a key feature of globalisation, knowledge economy, environmental crises and other economic logic – continues to significantly shift universities’ missions in another direction by creating winners and losers. Drawing on a range of theoretical perspectives, such as the glonacal agency heuristic, global economic and social forces, and empirical data, this paper examines the implications of these changes for equity in education, highlighting how global and national market-oriented policies, practices and outcomes continue to add to the stratification of higher education. Although the benefits of this global phenomenon are enormous, we maintain that the disbenefits are dire and could contribute to the narrowing of universities’ traditional missions, increased academic managerialism, the death of academic collegiality, and uneven development and unhealthy competition among universities locally and globally if not carefully considered. We admit that competition will continue to transform universities because the pressures of globalisation, as seen in recent times, increasingly influence higher education systems. However, since universities still operate mainly in their national context, we believe national educational policies can focus on reducing competition with other universities and promoting equity. To cement this way of thinking in universities both nationally and globally, we must understand the critical role of leadership as well as get it right.