The present article offers a mixed-method perspective on the investigation of determinants of effectiveness in quality assurance at higher education institutions. We collected survey data from German higher education institutions to analyse the degree to which quality managers perceive their approaches to quality assurance as effective. Based on this data, we develop an ordinary least squares regression model which explains perceived effectiveness through structural variables and certain quality assurance-related activities of quality managers. The results show that support by higher education institutions' higher management and cooperation with other education institutions are relevant preconditions for larger perceived degrees of quality assurance effectiveness. Moreover, quality managers' role as promoters of quality assurance exhibits significant correlations with perceived effectiveness. In contrast, sanctions and the perception of quality assurance as another administrative burden reveal negative correlations.

This paper presents empirical evidence on the adoption, implementation and the perceived effectiveness of quality management in teaching and learning in German higher education institutions. Theoretically, the article combines two new institutionalist approaches: institutional isomorphism and institutional entrepreneurship. Empirically, the study refers to qualitative interview data and quantitative survey data. The analysis reveals that isomorphism is a leading driver behind the adoption of quality management in German higher education institutions, whereas institutional entrepreneurship plays an important role in quality management implementation. While isomorphism can be regarded as a conclusive reason behind the absence of a perception of quality management's effectiveness, institutional entrepreneurship may function as a corrective towards the overall negative impact of isomorphic conformity by institutionalizing quality management in a sustainable manner.

No abstract

No abstract

This article expands our current knowledge about ministerial selection in coalition governments and analyses why ministerial candidates succeed in acquiring a cabinet position after general elections. It argues that political parties bargain over potential office-holders during government-formation processes, selecting future cabinet ministers from an emerging 'bargaining pool'. The article draws upon a new dataset comprising all ministrable candidates discussed by political parties during eight government-formation processes in Germany between 1983 and 2009. The conditional logit regression analysis reveals that temporal dynamics, such as the day she enters the pool, have a significant effect on her success in achieving a cabinet position. Other determinants of ministerial selection discussed in the existing literature, such as party and parliamentary expertise, are less relevant for achieving ministerial office. The article concludes that scholarship on ministerial selection requires a stronger emphasis for its endogenous nature in government-formation as well as the relevance of temporal dynamics in such processes.