Calculative regimes in the making: implementation and consequences in the context of Austrian public universities

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to answer the research question of how a calculative regime for public universities is implemented, how and under which conditions its symbolic use emerges and what kind of unintended consequences occur over time. Design/methodology/approach The empirical material presented in the paper derives methodically from a longitudinal qualitative research approach analyzing higher education systems (HES)-reforms in Austria. To better understand the consequences of the organizational changes in line with the new legal framework, 2 series of qualitative interviews in 2011/2012 and 2016/2017 on the field level and the organizational level were conducted. Findings Identifying two enabling consequences from the tactical behaviors of resistance and symbolic use, i.e. new processes of communication and horizontal network building, allows for theory-building with a focus on the dynamics how accounting begins, then next becomes an established infrastructure, is then destabilized and re-elaborated before it becomes, again, an infrastructure which is different from before. Research limitations/implications Although the findings are based on a national empirical context, they are linked to the international discourse on HES in transition and the role of calculative regimes including performance measurement and management attitudes and instruments. They are relevant for an international research community open-minded toward differentiated case studies in a longitudinal perspective on HES-reforms. Practical implications When reflecting on their own specific settings governing bodies and practitioners managing the transition of HES may find insights from longitudinal case studies inspiring. The dynamics initiated by new calculative regimes installed need a sensitive framework to handle dissent, resistance, tactical behaviors and changes in power relations between the field level and the organizational level. Originality/value This is a unique longitudinal case study of the Austrian HES and its public universities in transition.

Reconciling field-level logics and management control practices in research management at Austrian public universities

“…The ICR has to include APUs’ performance processes, including their outputs and impacts (UG 2002), which influences APUs’ internally applied MCPs. Austria was the first country worldwide to make ICRs obligatory for public universities and can therefore look back on nearly 17 years of performance-driven governmental steering that affects managerial processes of decision-making and control (Habersam et al , 2021, 2018, 2013). This “continued uniqueness” (Habersam et al , 2018, p. 35) of the mandatory ICR makes APUs an interesting field to study, because the introduction of the ICR significantly influenced APUs’ application of MCPs and how the governing field-level logics are translated into MCPs in the area of research.…”

“…APUs’ management control types are included in a specific set of MCPs and their corresponding narratives, which manifest in specific field-level logics. Unlike prior studies (Habersam et al , 2021; Grossi et al , 2020; Dobija et al , 2019; Ahrens and Khalifa, 2015), the paper analyses a broad range of management control types rather than focusing on MCPs in line with government or business logic. Furthermore, the paper analyses how APUs respond to the existence of different field-level logics in research management.…”

Performance measurement and management in the British higher education sector

“…Such an isomorphic interaction generated two types of unintended consequences for the overall NPM: shifting focus away from teaching and third-mission activities due to an increased emphasis on research performance; and, research becoming irrelevant for domestic stakeholders in order to engage international stakeholders. With the implementation of calculative practices in public universities, many changes related to power dynamics occurred including increased horizontal links among the working groups related to Knowledge Balance Sheets (KBS) at the organizational level (Habersam et al 2020 ). The government’s enhanced political control over HE and increased adoption of horizontal coordination resulted in transformed organizations where NPM with old public administration elements combined with post-NPM resulting into new compound and hybridized organizations with co-existing combinations of governance and other reform features (Christensen 2012 ).…”

“…Academics’ responses towards a meritocratic system for PM included ‘many’ who were ‘disturbed by the system’ and ‘a few’ who wanted to ‘disturb the system’ (Clarke and Knights 2015 ). Habersam et al ( 2020 ) called it a culture rather than a behaviour, which consisted of ‘new communicative practices’ emerging as a reaction at horizontal level within the organizational level. This new culture (open resistance for persuasion and symbolic use) allowed the continuous use of managerialism despite being heavily criticised for its dysfunctional effects.…”

Accountingisation of social care: the multiplicity and embeddedness of calculations and valuations in costing and caring practices

“…Such agency has been illustrated as having enabling power in the construction of accountable subjects (Bracci, 2014; Junne, 2018) and self-discipline (Junne and Huber, 2014). Linked to the contextual nature, an additional dimension is the increasing focus on (performance) measurements (Arnaboldi et al , 2015; Lapsley and Miller, 2019; Grossi et al , 2019), which has brought about the construction of calculative regimes (Habersam et al , 2020) and calculative organisational actors (Goretzki, 2013). Such transformations of public sector organisations have been described as an accountingisation process (Power and Laughlin, 1992) documented in professional contexts (Kurunmäki et al , 2003; Lapsley, 2007).…”