Neo-institutionalistische Hochschulforschung

Krücken, Georg; Röbken, Heinke

doi:10.1007/978-3-531-91496-1_16

Cited by 21 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a growing volume of neo-institutional literature on universities analysing developments in the sector (Krücken and Röbken 2009). Research in this vein has extended the neo-institutional observation that organisations in a sector tend towards isomorphism (DiMaggio and Powell 1983) as universities, worldwide, appear more similar.…”

Section: Theorising the Ethosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eliciting the institutional myth: exploring the ethos of ‘the university’ in Germany and England

Budd

2017

European Journal of Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is situated in relation to a critical mass of largely censorious commentary around global policy trends purportedly undermining, or even realigning, universities' 'traditional' ethos, but where the student perspective on this appears to have been largely ignored. Drawing on interviews with German and English undergraduates, it applies the neo-institutional theory of organisational fields supported by regulative, cognitive, and normative pillars (Scott 1995). The latter pillar, representing a sector's values, methods, and goals, is of particular interest here, and it will be argued that this and an ethos may correspond. The findings show that a sense of the participants' understanding of a university ethos/normative pillar could be discerned, with significant convergence between the two groups. However at the same time there was also divergence both within and between them, and this raises a number of novel empirical and theoretical questions.

show abstract

Section: Theorising the Ethosmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eliciting the institutional myth: exploring the ethos of ‘the university’ in Germany and England

Budd

2017

European Journal of Higher Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Institutionalist approaches have increasingly been applied to analyze the educational fi eld and have demonstrated their usefulness in understanding patterns of restructuring refl ecting diverse institutional pressures (Gumport and Sporn 1999 ;Krücken and Röbken 2009 ;Leisyte and Dee 2012 ;Meyer and Rowan 2006 ;Meyer et al 2007 ;Oplatka and Hemsley-Brown 2010 ;Tolbert 1985 ;Townley 1997 ). Since its foundations (DiMaggio and Powell 1983 ;Meyer and Rowan 1977 ;Zucker 1977 ), modern institutionalism has advanced to become a dominant approach to understanding organizations (Greenwood et al 2008 ).…”

Section: Organizational Field Of Higher Education: An Institutionalismentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-Level Governance in Universities: Strategy, Structure, Control

Frost¹,

Hattke²,

Reihlen

2016

Multi-Level Governance in Universities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Until now, higher education research has often used sociological neo-institutionalism to analyze the in-depth changes (Krücken & Röbken, 2009). According to neo-institutional research, organizations adapt their structure by pressure from outside (isomorphism caused by legitimacy).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

German Universities as Actors in Organizational Design – A Qualitative Study

Hagerer

Hoppe

2019

5th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd'19)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After the latest reforms in higher education according to the NPM (New Public Management), the autonomy of universities and the organizational perspective have been strengthened. According to predominantly used neo-institutional research in higher education, organizations adapt their structure by the pressure of legitimacy from outside. So the research question arises, if universities are actors and if so, what are the influencing factors on organizational structure. The goal is to point out the reasons for organizational design and if they act on their own or only adapt changes by pressure from outside. For this, interviews with 16 experts in faculty management are conducted and interpreted using qualitative content analysis according to Mayring and Grounded Theory. The results show that it is possible for faculties to change and design their organizational structures. There is staff responsible for this task. They work in the faculty between management and administration. Reasons to change the organizational structure are not caused by legitimacy. Much more, the new tasks cause a real need for new positions. This argumentation is not in line with neo-institutionalism. So the results strengthen the thesis that neo-institutionalism is not sufficient anymore to explain the organizational change of universities.

show abstract

Neo-institutionalistische Hochschulforschung

Cited by 21 publications

References 29 publications

Eliciting the institutional myth: exploring the ethos of ‘the university’ in Germany and England

Eliciting the institutional myth: exploring the ethos of ‘the university’ in Germany and England

Multi-Level Governance in Universities: Strategy, Structure, Control

German Universities as Actors in Organizational Design – A Qualitative Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About