Language games: University responses to ranking metrics

Abstract

League tables of universities that measure performance in various ways are now commonplace, with numerous bodies providing their own rankings of how institutions throughout the world are seen to be performing on a range of metrics. This paper uses Lyotard's notion of language games to theorise that universities are regaining some power over being placed on league tables by creating narratives that manipulate their rankings to promote their own strengths. This paper examines the findings of a study involving university responses to global rankings throughout 2016 produced by two major ranking bodies, Times Higher Education and QS Top Universities. The existing literature has established that ranking tables can be used as a vehicle for humiliation and can produce terrors for all those involved. Thus, the significance of this study's findings is in new ways of theorising university responses to appearing on league tables at a time when academia is a high‐stakes activity where institutions’ abilities are measured and reported on at a global scale.

Examining university leadership and the increase in workplace hostility through a Bourdieusian lens

“…Bourdieu provides a theoretical lens by which to understand why a tension can exist between academics and those entrusted to bring managerial processes into faculties who may not have a strong research profile. At the same time, the literature demonstrates why decades of systemic changes have made managerial practices in faculties a necessity (Esson & Ertl, 2016; Heffernan & Heffernan, 2018a). One approach might be that a tension between managers and academics will always exist.…”

“…This shift has led institutions to increasingly adhere to consumer‐driven practices. They devise marketing strategies and regularly promote themselves on their research and reputation ranking table standings (Heffernan & Heffernan, 2018a), because these rankings do matter in the 21st century and can play a role in the allocation of resources (Pusser & Marginson, 2013). The consequence of these actions is that for at least the last two decades researchers have known that institutions operating in the knowledge‐based economy are causing a shift in the traditional appointment and role of higher education leaders (Blackmore, 2002; Bosetti & Walker, 2009).…”

“…That is to say, Bourdieu never used theory for the sake of using theory. This paper's author has researched and published about the university sector's managerial shift, institutions adjusting to market conditions, and the implications this has on the administration and academics, and the hostility it can bring to their relations (Heffernan, 2017,2018a,2018b,2019,2020; Heffernan & Bosetti, 2020; Heffernan & Heffernan, 2018a, 2018b), and while these publications have used theory, they have not all engaged in theory to such an extent as does this paper. The use of theory in this paper has been driven by the data and problems at hand; as Thomson wrote of using Bourdieu, the theory ‘must be brought into conversation with particular data and used to make sense of a particular research question and to guide its empirical investigation’, because theory ‘cannot be draped over data like a tablecloth’ (Thomson, 2017, p. 114).…”

The world university rankings: differentiations in rankings according to the expanded indicator set

“…Tüm bu eleştirilere rağmen, uluslararası sıralamalar üniversite yöneticileri tarafından başarının göstergesi olarak akademik platformlarda kurumlarına ün kazandırmak, kurumlarının iş dünyasındaki saygınlığını artırmak amacıyla kullanılmaktadır (Hazelkorn, 2015;Shin & Khem, 2013;Tapper, & Filippakou, 2009). Ayrıca, üniversite yöneticileri hem devlet kurumları ile sanayi kuruluşlarından daha fazla fon edinebilmek hem de potansiyeli yüksek araştırmacıları ve başarılı öğrencileri kurumlarına çekebilmek amacıyla, uluslararası sıralamalardaki yerlerini bölgesel veya disipliner anlamda daraltılmış olarak da kullanabilmektedir (Heffernan & Heffernan, 2018). Bu noktada, uluslararası sıralamalardaki farklılaşmalara neden olan ve özellikle yukarı yönlü sıçrama yapmayı sağlayacak sıralama göstergelerinin neler olduğu başta üniversite yöneticileri olmak üzere yükseköğretim paydaşları için daha fazla önem kazanmaktadır.…”

Entrepreneurship in Higher Education: The impact of competition‐based policy programmes exemplified by the German Excellence Initiative

“…While the ranking‐dominating Anglo‐Saxon universities tend to be highly market‐oriented, the quickly catching up Asian universities are centralised and state‐oriented. Universities from Continental Europe, however, seem to be stuck in the middle (Audretsch, Lehmann, & Paleari, ; Heffernan & Heffernan, ), as reflected in only mediocre ranking positions.…”