Collegiality in modern universities – the composition of governance ideals and practices

Abstract

The questions of how universities are governed and how they should be governed have recently gained attention throughout Europe. The history of universities shows a diffused pattern of repeated reform efforts. However, this situation has more or less exploded since the turn of the century, bringing in new modes of organising. In short we can observe a diffusion of more managerial forms of organising, leading to a situation where different governance ideals co-act. In this paper we analyse the interplay of several governance ideals as they play out in practice. We begin and end the essay by noting that collegiality is a modern, efficient and practical form of governance, but it never works entirely on its own; rather it interacts with other modes of governance. After an introduction of diverse modes of governance, analysed as ideal type models, we exemplify how those diverse modes mix in practices of governance and organising. A more theoretical argument that runs through the paper is a critique of the dominance of ideal types of discussions on university governance and in organisation theory more generally, to the extent that those ideal types tend to be reified.

The Changing Roles of Academic Leaders: Decision-Making, Power, and Performance

“…The work of professionals relies on discretion, trust, autonomy, and collegiality, and decision-making is consensus-oriented, collegial, and bottom-up. The criteria of selection are based on professional skills, and the best amongst peers are selected (Sahlin and Eriksson-Zetterquist 2016). Different types of professionals advocate distinct ideas on how to practice management (Abbott 1988;Freidson 1994).…”

Kjønnsbalanse gjennom aksjonsforskning og lokal kunnskaping

“…Universiteter er preget av en blanding av kollegial og linjepreget organisering, noe som representerer to forskjellige styringslogikker som gjerne blandes (Sahlin og Eriksson-Zetterquist 2016). Arbeid for likestilling og kjønnsbalanse preges på forskjellige måter av disse styringslogikkene.…”

Governing through accountability: Gendered moral selves and the (im)possibilities of resistance in the neoliberal university

“…Neoliberal practices foster male ascendancy by promoting a new ideal academic subject profoundly imbued with masculinity (Krefting, ), centred on individualism, entrepreneurship, competition and performance (Bagilhole & Goode, ; Clarke, Knights, & Jarvis, ; Deem, ; Devine et al, ; Etzkowitz, Webster, Gebhardt, & Terra, ; Knights & Clarke, ; Nikunen, ; Thomas & Davies, ; Willmott, ). Doing so, they undermine the values of academic collegiality, collaboration and trust (Barry et al, ; Bryson, ; Mauthner & Edwards, ; Sahlin & Eriksson‐Zetterquist, ). At odds with women's understanding of themselves, this academic ideal requires them to develop highly ‘elastic’ selves to cope with multiple demands in and outside academia (Devine et al, ; see also Mauthner & Edwards, ; Parsons & Priola, ), and feeding into a fantasy of achievable work–life balance (see also Bloom, ; Thomas & Davies, ).…”

“…Neoliberal practices foster male ascendancy by promoting a new ideal academic subject profoundly imbued with masculinity (Krefting, 2003), centred on individualism, entrepreneurship, competition and performance (Bagilhole & Goode, 2001;Clarke, Knights, & Jarvis, 2012;Deem, 1998;Devine et al, 2011;Etzkowitz, Webster, Gebhardt, & Terra, 2000;Knights & Clarke, 2014;Nikunen, 2012; Thomas & Davies, 2002;Willmott, 1995). Doing so, they undermine the values of academic collegiality, collaboration and trust (Barry et al, 2012;Bryson, 2004;Mauthner & Edwards, 2010;Sahlin & Eriksson-Zetterquist, 2016).…”