Organisationsforschung

Meier, Frank; Schimank, Uwe

doi:10.1007/978-3-531-91993-5_8

Cited by 17 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A key aspect of this ‘new governance’ is a shift from a self-management model to a management model. One indicator for this is a shift in personnel: ‘More and more employees are being recruited – for example as fundraisers, controlling specialists, quality managers, faculty managers or study program managers – to perform the new management activities, and the proportion of this personnel in the total workforce is clearly increasing’ (Meier and Schimank, 2010, p. 113). In line with this finding, Friedrichsmeier and colleagues found that the proportion of staff engaged in public relations has also increased (2013, p. 23).…”

Section: Comparison Of Organisational Forms Of Science Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…University leaders can announce that they want their academic members to work with the press office, they can promote and reward these activities, but media attention cannot simply be ordered. There also is a lack of sanctions, which makes scientists notoriously difficult members from the point of view of the organisation's management and outreach personnel (Meier and Schimank, 2010, p. 108). Merton has captured this phenomenon with the distinction between cosmopolitans and locals (1957) and Gouldner has already applied this distinction to organisations (1957).…”

Section: Comparison Of Organisational Forms Of Science Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Organisation matters: towards an organisational sociology of science communication

Rödder¹

2020

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper looks at science communication through an organisational lens with the aim of assessing the relevance of different organisational forms for science communication.Design/methodology/approachThe paper explores science communication in different organisational forms. Based on conceptual considerations and by reviewing existing empirical literature, the paper selects and compares three organisational forms of science communication: the editorial office of a daily newspaper, the press office of a university and the Science Media Centre.FindingsThe paper shows the relevance of organisation for science communication by comparing three organisational forms. The first two, the science news desk and the press office, have the character of a sub-system of an organisation, while the third, the Science Media Centre, forms its own organisation. The paper shows how the respective set-up shapes science-media contacts with a focus on the occurrence and resolution of conflicts.Research limitations/implicationsThe paper proposes a conceptual framework for studying science communication through an organisational lens but leaves comparative empirical studies of all types to future research. Yet, it outlines and compares implications of the formal organisation of science communication from a conceptual point of view.Practical implicationsThe findings provide information on the structural impact of different organisational forms on science communication and point to where conflicting expectations, and thus potential conflicts, are most likely to occur in each case. A reflection of structurally conflicting expectations and how they can be overcome in specific situations is of high practical value for all science communication activities.Originality/valueOrganisational theorists have long argued that organisations are the key to understanding society. Despite their undoubted relevance, however, organisations and their influence on science communication have so far been much less analysed – both conceptually and empirically – than its contents, its practices and its impacts on public understanding, public policy, and on science and scientists. The paper contributes to the emerging field with conceptual considerations towards an organisational sociology of science communication.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Organisational Forms Of Science Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparison Of Organisational Forms Of Science Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organisation matters: towards an organisational sociology of science communication

Rödder¹

2020

JCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Still in 2001, the sociologist R. Paris asserted that organization sociology in Germany has rarely dealt with universities (Paris 2001). By now, however, studies explicitly address the organizational character of the university (Pellert 1999;Reichwald 2000;Stichweh 2005;Enders 2008;Meier and Schimank 2010;Hüther 2010;Wilkesmann and Schmid 2012). This is due to changes in the wake of new public management (Huber 2012) and the expansion of higher education.…”

Section: The (Organizational) Character Of the (German) Universitymentioning

confidence: 99%

(German) Universities as multiple hybrid organizations

Kleimann

2018

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper claims that the organizational character of the (German) university can be comprehended best with the aid of the concept Bmultiple hybrid organization.^To corroborate this claim, I reconstruct two lines of argument that have dominated the discourse on the organizational nature of the German university so far. This discourse has only started in the late 1980s and early 1990s in the wake of new public management emphasizing that the reform of higher education governance has turned German universities into corporate actors (Meier 2009; Krücken and Meier 2006). At the same time, voices have risen advocating the singularity of the university and contrasting it to bureaucratic and corporate forms of organization. The paper starts by outlining these two strands of argumentation: the first highlights the organizational normality of the German university, the next its singularity. Against this background, I shall argue that both positions can be integrated if we rely on the term Bmultiple hybrid organization.^This concept is integrated into the systems theory concept of formal organization which serves as a theoretical means for analyzing organizations at large. The new concept of multiple organizational hybridity demonstrates its usefulness in showing that the structural particularity of the German university is rooted in numerous frictions pertaining to all its organizational structures.

show abstract

„Der Ball muss dezentral gefangen werden.“ - Organisationssoziologische Überlegungen zu den Möglichkeiten und Grenzen hochschulinterner Steuerungsprozesse am Beispiel der Qualitätssicherung in der Lehre

Kloke

Krücken

2012

Hochschule Als Organisation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Organisationsforschung

Cited by 17 publications

References 18 publications

Organisation matters: towards an organisational sociology of science communication

Organisation matters: towards an organisational sociology of science communication

(German) Universities as multiple hybrid organizations

„Der Ball muss dezentral gefangen werden.“ - Organisationssoziologische Überlegungen zu den Möglichkeiten und Grenzen hochschulinterner Steuerungsprozesse am Beispiel der Qualitätssicherung in der Lehre

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About