Internationalization in higher education: faculty tradeoffs under the social exchange theory

Abstract

Purpose Although faculty members are regarded as one of the main agents of internationalization in higher education (IHE), research has focused on the upper levels of analysis (e.g. country or educational institution) rather than the individual. The purpose of this paper is to draw from social exchange theory (SET) to examine how the perceptions of costs and expected rewards affect faculty members’ choices of international activities. Design/methodology/approach This qualitative study adopted as main methods a review of the literature on IHE and in-depth interviews based on a semi-structured script with an international sample. A sample of 16 researches was selected for interview using the snowball technique of sample selection. Findings The authors verified that faculty may seek internationalization in search of job opportunities, greater social approval, greater autonomy and greater security. On the other hand, temporal, monetary, psychological and physical costs discourage faculty members from seeking international insertion. Based on these tradeoffs, our findings suggest that although the basic tenets of SET do apply, the theory does not explicitly address two issues: the fact that costs and rewards are intricately related, and the apparent mismatch between (short-term) costs and (long-term) expected rewards. Originality/value This study contributes to the IHE literature by highlighting the crucial role of faculty – that is, the level of analysis of the individual – which has been under-researched and by setting out the reasoning that supports the decision of faculty members to seek (higher) international insertion. Furthermore, this study extends SET as a plausible explanation for the self-internationalization decision by scholars.

A Qualitative Assessment of the Determinants of Faculty Engagement in Internationalization: A Chinese Perspective

“…Different goals, particularly rewarding ones (cf. Fairweather, 2002), drive faculty engagement (Nyangau, 2018a; Romani-Dias & Carneiro, 2019; Sanderlin, 2012). The interview analysis revealed that faculty anticipated altruistic, self-beneficial (Nyangau, 2018b), within individuals, and people-environment relationships (Ford, 1992) consequences in their goals.…”

The Internationalization of Business Schools Based on Faculty Activities: Explanations From the Social Exchange Theory

“…The literature has discussed the internationalization of education, the internationalization of higher education institutions, and the internationalization of students (Gu, Schweisfurth, & Day, 2010;Tran & Pham, 2016;Wit, 2020;Wu, 2018). There are few studies, however, that deal effectively with the internationalization of academics (Dewey & Duff, 2009;Sanderson, 2008;Woldegiyorgis, Proctor, & Wit, 2018;Romani-Dias, Carneiro & Barbosa, 2019;Romani-Dias & Carneiro, 2020). We shall now describe, therefore, the concepts that pertain to the topic.…”

Paradox in the making: toward a theory of utility maximization in human-commercial robot interactions

“…Conceptually, SET describes an individual's social actions that are primarily motivated by the potential benefits that the individual could receive from another individual (Blau, 1964). Hence, SET posits that social interactions among humans are executed through exchanging material and non-material goods (Romani-Dias and Carneiro, 2020). Because the central premise of SET is that social interactions are commenced to exchange social and material resources, exchanges in a social context tend to induce feelings of obligation to reciprocate stemming from gratitude and mutual trust (Tsai and Cheng, 2012).…”