During the past few decades traditional state-centred governing arrangements have been critiqued and replaced by alternative modes of governance. Higher education is one of the public sectors where such shifts in governance have been seen. As a consequence of the reshuffl ing of authority and responsibilities across the different levels in Dutch higher education, universities as organizations have become important foci of attention in the system ' s coordination. The main question addressed in this article is to what extent we can speak of an organizational transformation of Dutch universities. Based on conceptual ideas from researchers such as Hinings (1996), Ferlie et al. (1996) , and Brunsson and Sahlin-Andersson (2000) , we use a framework that focuses attention on the concepts of the construction of identity, hierarchy and rationality to systematically analyse the various aspects of transformations of professional organizations.

The main aim of this article is to contribute to the understanding of organizational autonomy and control in higher education reform and related expectations as regards the performance of universities. Our analyses draws on principal-agent models as a normative theory of policy reform, and institutionalist approaches in public policy and institutional design as an analytical theory of policy reform. We discuss how the dominant narrative of political reform moves away from traditional beliefs in university autonomy that are built on institutional trust and linked to professional autonomy. In the emerging narrative of political change, autonomy becomes re-defined as the 'new organizational autonomy' of universities as both strategic actors and as an addressee of governmental control. The concept of 'regulatory autonomy' captures the use of organizational autonomy of universities as a tool of a new regime of governmental control. Exemplified by the Dutch case, we analyze autonomy policies for strengthening managerial discretion and internal control of universities that are combined with regulatory policies for external control that steer organizational choices. Regulatory autonomy thus aims at aligning universities more closely with governmental goals and improve respective performance. Our literature review shows, however, that there is scarce, inconclusive and methodologically problematic evidence for a link between 'organizational autonomy and performance'. We point at promising avenues for further research on autonomy and performance as two core concepts in the contemporary higher education debate.

This article investigates the form of European universities to determine the extent to which they resemble the characteristics of complete organizations and whether the forms are associated with modernization policy pressure, national institutional frames and organizational characteristics. An original data set of twenty-six universities from eight countries was used. Specialist universities have a stronger identity, whereas the level of hierarchy and rationality is clearly associated with the intensity of modernization policies. At the same time, evidence suggests limitations for universities to become complete, as mechanisms allowing the development of some dimensions seemingly constrain the capability to develop others.

The expectations and demands with respect to teaching and research have been changing for universities due to changes in their institutional environments. Born out of changing national research policies and modern governance arrangements, efficiency, effectiveness and output-oriented cultures have become increasingly important. In this article we ask the question of what the consequences of these changing institutional environments are for the teaching-research nexus as experienced by academics at universities. We explore the changing practices of teaching and research in eight research units in research-led universities in England and The Netherlands. The sources of our empirical investigation are documentary evidence as well as interview data from 48 academics in biotechnology and medieval history. Our findings suggest that teaching and research are increasingly falling apart as two distinct activities. Success or failure in research acquisition and performance assessments has serious implications for the work portfolios in terms of teaching and research load of the research units.

Since the 1990s, "new governance" has been at the forefront of discussions on governance in higher education and elsewhere. "Less government and more governance" has become the widely shared credo (Frederickson 1999:705). Supported by neo-liberal ideologies, authorities and powers have been redistributed across the various levels of higher education systems. In many European countries, coordination has changed from a classical form of regulation by one actor, the state, to forms in which various actors at various system levels coordinate the system ("multi-level multiactor governance"). Coordination increasingly takes place through interconnected policy levels, ranging from the local to the global level, with a substantial number of actors who in networks of interdependent relationships influence agenda setting, policy development, policy determination, policy implementation and evaluation (de Boer 2006). Generally speaking, we witness the blend of various forms of governance, in which elements of traditional governance, with a key role of the state, self-governance, having a long tradition in higher education, and network governance are present.In this chapter, we will take a more differentiated and analytical view on governance in four university systems. We will compare changes of university governance in England, the Netherlands, Austria and Germany over the last two decades. For this purpose, we have established what we call the "governance equalizer". After a brief introduction on governance, this analytical tool is presented in the first part of this chapter. The second